Nuclear energy protects air quality by producing massive amounts of carbon-free electricity. It powers communities in 28 U.S. states and contributes to many non-electric applications, ranging from the medical field to space exploration .
The Office of Nuclear Energy within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) focuses its research primarily on maintaining the existing fleet of reactors, developing new advanced reactor technologies, and improving the nuclear fuel cycle to increase the sustainability of our energy supply and strengthen the U.S. economy.
Below are some of the main advantages of nuclear energy and the challenges currently facing the industry today.
Advantages of Nuclear Energy
Clean energy source.
Nuclear is the largest source of clean power in the United States. It generates nearly 775 billion kilowatthours of electricity each year and produces nearly half of the nation’s emissions-free electricity. This avoids more than 471 million metric tons of carbon each year, which is the equivalent of removing 100 million cars off of the road.
Creates Jobs
The nuclear industry supports nearly half a million jobs in the United States. Domestic nuclear power plants can employ up to 800 workers with salaries that are 50% higher than those of other generation sources. They also contribute billions of dollars annually to local economies through federal and state tax revenues.
Supports National Security
A strong civilian nuclear sector is essential to U.S. national security and energy diplomacy. The United States must maintain its global leadership in this arena to influence the peaceful use of nuclear technologies. The U.S. government works with countries in this capacity to build relationships and develop new opportunities for the nation’s nuclear technologies.
Challenges of Nuclear Energy
Public awareness.
Commercial nuclear power is sometimes viewed by the general public as a dangerous or unstable process. This perception is often based on three global nuclear accidents, its false association with nuclear weapons, and how it is portrayed on popular television shows and films.
DOE and its national labs are working with industry to develop new reactors and fuels that will increase the overall performance of these technologies and reduce the amount of nuclear waste that is produced.
DOE also works to provide accurate, fact-based information about nuclear energy through its social media and STEM outreach efforts to educate the public on the benefits of nuclear energy.
Used Fuel Transportation, Storage and Disposal
Many people view used fuel as a growing problem and are apprehensive about its transportation, storage, and disposal. DOE is responsible for the eventual disposal and associated transport of all used fuel , most of which is currently securely stored at more than 70 sites in 35 states. For the foreseeable future, this fuel can safely remain at these facilities until a permanent disposal solution is determined by Congress.
DOE is currently evaluating nuclear power plant sites and nearby transportation infrastructure to support the eventual transport of used fuel away from these sites.
Subject to appropriations, the Department is moving forward on a government-owned consolidated interim storage facility project that includes rail transportation .
The location of the storage facility would be selected through DOE's consent-based siting process that puts communities at the forefront and would ultimately reduce the number of locations where commercial spent nuclear fuel is stored in the United States.
Constructing New Power Plants
Building a nuclear power plant can be discouraging for stakeholders. Conventional reactor designs are considered multi-billion dollar infrastructure projects. High capital costs, licensing and regulation approvals, coupled with long lead times and construction delays, have also deterred public interest.
Microreactor (left) - Small Modular Reactor (right)
DOE is rebuilding its nuclear workforce by supporting the construction of two new reactors at Plant Vogtle in Waynesboro, Georgia. The units are the first new reactors to begin construction in the United States in more than 30 years. The expansion project supported up to 9,000 workers at peak construction and created 800 permanent jobs at the facility when the units came online in 2023 and 2024.
DOE is also supporting the development of smaller reactor designs, such as microreactors and small modular reactors , that will offer even more flexibility in size and power capacity to the customer. These factory-built systems are expected to dramatically reduce construction timelines and will make nuclear more affordable to build and operate.
High Operating Costs
Challenging market conditions have left the nuclear industry struggling to compete. DOE’s Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) program is working to overcome these economic challenges by modernizing plant systems to reduce operation and maintenance costs, while improving performance. In addition to its materials research that supports the long-term operation of the nation’s fleet of reactors, the program is also looking to diversify plant products through non-electric applications such as water desalination and hydrogen production .
To further improve operating costs. DOE is also working with industry to develop new fuels and cladding known as accident tolerant fuels . These new fuels could increase plant performance, allowing for longer response times and will produce less waste. Accident tolerant fuels could gain widespread use by 2025.
*Update June 2024
- Name This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
- Climate Change
- Policy & Economics
- Biodiversity
- Conservation
Get focused newsletters especially designed to be concise and easy to digest
- ESSENTIAL BRIEFING 3 times weekly
- TOP STORY ROUNDUP Once a week
- MONTHLY OVERVIEW Once a month
- Enter your email *
- Email This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
The Advantages and Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy
Since the first nuclear plant started operations in the 1950s, the world has been highly divided on nuclear as a source of energy. While it is a cleaner alternative to fossil fuels, this type of power is also associated with some of the world’s most dangerous and deadliest weapons, not to mention nuclear disasters . The extremely high cost and lengthy process to build nuclear plants are compensated by the fact that producing nuclear energy is not nearly as polluting as oil and coal. In the race to net-zero carbon emissions, should countries still rely on nuclear energy or should they make space for more fossil fuels and renewable energy sources? We take a look at the advantages and disadvantages of nuclear energy.
What Is Nuclear Energy?
Nuclear energy is the energy source found in an atom’s nucleus, or core. Once extracted, this energy can be used to produce electricity by creating nuclear fission in a reactor through two kinds of atomic reaction: nuclear fusion and nuclear fission. During the latter, uranium used as fuel causes atoms to split into two or more nuclei. The energy released from fission generates heat that brings a cooling agent, usually water, to boil. The steam deriving from boiling or pressurised water is then channelled to spin turbines to generate electricity. To produce nuclear fission, reactors make use of uranium as fuel.
For centuries, the industrialisation of economies around the world was made possible by fossil fuels like coal, natural gas, and petroleum and only in recent years countries opened up to alternative, renewable sources like solar and wind energy. In the 1950s, early commercial nuclear power stations started operations, offering to many countries around the world an alternative to oil and gas import dependency and a far less polluting energy source than fossil fuels. Following the 1970s energy crisis and the dramatic increase of oil prices that resulted from it, more and more countries decided to embark on nuclear power programmes. Indeed, most reactors have been built between 1970 and 1985 worldwide. Today, nuclear energy meets around 10% of global energy demand , with 439 currently operational nuclear plants in 32 countries and about 55 new reactors under construction.
In 2020, 13 countries produced at least one-quarter of their total electricity from nuclear, with the US, China, and France dominating the market by far.
Fossil fuels make up 60% of the United States’ electricity while the remaining 40% is equally split between renewables and nuclear power. France embarked on a sweeping expansion of its nuclear power industry in the 1970s with the ultimate goal of breaking its dependence on foreign oil. In doing this, the country was able to build up its economy by simultaneously cutting its emissions at a rate never seen before. Today, France is home to 56 operating reactors and it relies on nuclear power for 70% of its electricity .
You might also like: A ‘Breakthrough’ In Nuclear Fusion: What Does It Mean for the Future of Energy Generation?
Advantages of Nuclear Energy
France’s success in cutting down emissions is a clear example of some of the main advantages of nuclear energy over fossil fuels. First and foremost, nuclear energy is clean and it provides pollution-free power with no greenhouse gas emissions. Contrary to what many believe, cooling towers in nuclear plants only emit water vapour and are thus, not releasing any pollutant or radioactive substance into the atmosphere. Compared to all the energy alternatives we currently have on hand, many experts believe that nuclear energy is indeed one of the cleanest sources. Many nuclear energy supporters also argue that nuclear power is responsible for the fastest decarbonisation effort in history , with big nuclear players like France, Saudi Arabia, Canada, and South Korea being among the countries that recorded the fastest decline in carbon intensity and experienced a clean energy transition by building nuclear reactors and hydroelectric dams.
Earlier this year, the European Commission took a clear stance on nuclear power by labelling it a green source of energy in its classification system establishing a list of environmentally sustainable economic activities. While nuclear energy may be clean and its production emission-free, experts highlight a hidden danger of this power: nuclear waste. The highly radioactive and toxic byproduct from nuclear reactors can remain radioactive for tens of thousands of years. However, this is still considered a much easier environmental problem to solve than climate change. The main reason for this is that as much as 90% of the nuclear waste generated by the production of nuclear energy can be recycled. Indeed, the fuel used in a reactor, typically uranium, can be treated and put into another reactor as only a small amount of energy in their fuel is extracted in the fission process.
A rather important advantage of nuclear energy is that it is much safer than fossil fuels from a public health perspective. The pro-nuclear movement leverages the fact that nuclear waste is not even remotely as dangerous as the toxic chemicals coming from fossil fuels. Indeed, coal and oil act as ‘ invisible killers ’ and are responsible for 1 in 5 deaths worldwide . In 2018 alone, fossil fuels killed 8.7 million people globally. In contrast, in nearly 70 years since the beginning of nuclear power, only three accidents have raised public alarm: the 1979 Three Mile Island accident, the 1986 Chernobyl disaster and the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster. Of these, only the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear plant in Ukraine directly caused any deaths.
Finally, nuclear energy has some advantages compared to some of the most popular renewable energy sources. According to the US Office of Nuclear Energy , nuclear power has by far the highest capacity factor, with plants requiring less maintenance, capable to operate for up to two years before refuelling and able to produce maximum power more than 93% of the time during the year, making them three times more reliable than wind and solar plants.
You might also like: Nuclear Energy: A Silver Bullet For Clean Energy?
Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy
The anti-nuclear movement opposes the use of this type of energy for several reasons. The first and currently most talked about disadvantage of nuclear energy is the nuclear weapon proliferation, a debate triggered by the deadly atomic bombing of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during the Second World War and recently reopened following rising concerns over nuclear escalation in the Ukraine-Russia conflict . After the world saw the highly destructive effect of these bombs, which caused the death of tens of thousands of people, not only in the impact itself but also in the days, weeks, and months after the tragedy as a consequence of radiation sickness, nuclear energy evolved to a pure means of generating electricity. In 1970, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons entered into force. Its objective was to prevent the spread of such weapons to eventually achieve nuclear disarmament as well as promote peaceful uses of nuclear energy. However, opposers of this energy source still see nuclear energy as being deeply intertwined with nuclear weapons technologies and believe that, with nuclear technologies becoming globally available, the risk of them falling into the wrong hands is high, especially in countries with high levels of corruption and instability.
As mentioned in the previous section, nuclear energy is clean. However, radioactive nuclear waste contains highly poisonous chemicals like plutonium and the uranium pellets used as fuel. These materials can be extremely toxic for tens of thousands of years and for this reason, they need to be meticulously and permanently disposed of. Since the 1950s, a stockpile of 250,000 tonnes of highly radioactive nuclear waste has been accumulated and distributed across the world, with 90,000 metric tons stored in the US alone. Knowing the dangers of nuclear waste, many oppose nuclear energy for fears of accidents, despite these being extremely unlikely to happen. Indeed, opposers know that when nuclear does fail, it can fail spectacularly. They were reminded of this in 2011, when the Fukushima disaster, despite not killing anyone directly, led to the displacement of more than 150,000 people, thousands of evacuation/related deaths and billions of dollars in cleanup costs.
Lastly, if compared to other sources of energy, nuclear power is one of the most expensive and time-consuming forms of energy. Nuclear plants cost billions of dollars to build and they take much longer than any other infrastructure for renewable energy, sometimes even more than a decade. However, while nuclear power plants are expensive to build, they are relatively cheap to run , a factor that improves its competitiveness. Still, the long building process is considered a significant obstacle in the run to net-zero emissions that countries around the world have committed to. If they hope to meet their emission reduction targets in time, they cannot afford to rely on new nuclear plants.
You might also like: The Nuclear Waste Disposal Dilemma
Who Wins the Nuclear Debate?
There are a multitude of advantages and disadvantages of nuclear energy and the debate on whether to keep this technology or find other alternatives is destined to continue in the years to come.
Nuclear power can be a highly destructive weapon, but the risks of a nuclear catastrophe are relatively low. While historic nuclear disasters can be counted on the fingers of a single hand, they are remembered for their devastating impact and the life-threatening consequences they sparked (or almost sparked). However, it is important to remember that fossil fuels like coal and oil represent a much bigger threat and silently kill millions of people every year worldwide.
Another big aspect to take into account, and one that is currently discussed by global leaders, is the dependence of some of the world’s largest economies on countries like Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq for fossil fuels. While the 2011 Fukushima disaster, for example, pushed the then-German Chancellor Angela Merkel to close all of Germany’s nuclear plants, her decision only increased the country’s dependence on much more polluting Russian oil. Nuclear supporters argue that relying on nuclear energy would decrease the energy dependency from third countries. However, raw materials such as the uranium needed to make plants function would still need to be imported from countries like Canada, Kazakhstan, and Australia.
The debate thus shifts to another problem: which countries should we rely on for imports and, most importantly, is it worth keeping these dependencies?
This story is funded by readers like you
Our non-profit newsroom provides climate coverage free of charge and advertising. Your one-off or monthly donations play a crucial role in supporting our operations, expanding our reach, and maintaining our editorial independence.
About EO | Mission Statement | Impact & Reach | Write for us
About the Author
Martina Igini
Top 7 Smart Cities in the World in 2024
What the Future of Renewable Energy Looks Like
The Environmental Impacts of Lithium and Cobalt Mining
Hand-picked stories weekly or monthly. We promise, no spam!
- Phone This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Boost this article By donating us $100, $50 or subscribe to Boosting $10/month – we can get this article and others in front of tens of thousands of specially targeted readers. This targeted Boosting – helps us to reach wider audiences – aiming to convince the unconvinced, to inform the uninformed, to enlighten the dogmatic.
45,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today
Meet top uk universities from the comfort of your home, here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.
Verification Code
An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify
Thanks for your comment !
Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.
- School Education /
Essay on Nuclear Energy in 500+ words for School Students
- Updated on
- Dec 30, 2023
Essay on Nuclear Energy: Nuclear energy has been fascinating and controversial since the beginning. Using atomic power to generate electricity holds the promise of huge energy supplies but we cannot overlook the concerns about safety, environmental impact, and the increase in potential weapon increase.
The blog will help you to explore various aspects of energy seeking its history, advantages, disadvantages, and role in addressing the global energy challenge.
Table of Contents
- 1 History Overview
- 2 Nuclear Technology
- 3 Advantages of Nuclear Energy
- 4 Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy
- 5 Safety Measures and Regulations of Nuclear Energy
- 6 Concerns of Nuclear Proliferation
- 7 Future Prospects and Innovations of Nuclear Energy
- 8 FAQs
Also Read: Find List of Nuclear Power Plants In India
History Overview
The roots of nuclear energy have their roots back to the early 20th century when innovative discoveries in physics laid the foundation for understanding atomic structure. In the year 1938, Otto Hahn, a German chemist and Fritz Stassman, a German physical chemist discovered nuclear fission, the splitting of atomic nuclei. This discovery opened the way for utilising the immense energy released during the process of fission.
Also Read: What are the Different Types of Energy?
Nuclear Technology
Nuclear power plants use controlled fission to produce heat. The heat generated is further used to produce steam, by turning the turbines connected to generators that produce electricity. This process takes place in two types of reactors: Pressurized Water Reactors (PWR) and Boiling Water Reactors (BWR). PWRs use pressurised water to transfer heat. Whereas, BWRs allow water to boil, which produces steam directly.
Also Read: Nuclear Engineering Course: Universities and Careers
Advantages of Nuclear Energy
Let us learn about the positive aspects of nuclear energy in the following:
1. High Energy Density
Nuclear energy possesses an unparalleled energy density which means that a small amount of nuclear fuel can produce a substantial amount of electricity. This high energy density efficiency makes nuclear power reliable and powerful.
2. Low Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Unlike other traditional fossil fuels, nuclear power generation produces minimum greenhouse gas emissions during electricity generation. The low greenhouse gas emissions feature positions nuclear energy as a potential solution to weakening climate change.
3. Base Load Power
Nuclear power plants provide consistent, baseload power, continuously operating at a stable output level. This makes nuclear energy reliable for meeting the constant demand for electricity, complementing intermittent renewable sources of energy like wind and solar.
Also Read: How to Become a Nuclear Engineer in India?
Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy
After learning the pros of nuclear energy, now let’s switch to the cons of nuclear energy.
1. Radioactive Waste
One of the most important challenges that is associated with nuclear energy is the management and disposal of radioactive waste. Nuclear power gives rise to spent fuel and other radioactive byproducts that require secure, long-term storage solutions.
2. Nuclear Accidents
The two catastrophic accidents at Chornobyl in 1986 and Fukushima in 2011 underlined the potential risks of nuclear power. These nuclear accidents can lead to severe environmental contamination, human casualties, and long-lasting negative perceptions of the technology.
3. High Initial Costs
The construction of nuclear power plants includes substantial upfront costs. Moreover, stringent safety measures contribute to the overall expenses, which makes nuclear energy economically challenging compared to some renewable alternatives.
Also Read: What is the IAEA Full Form?
Safety Measures and Regulations of Nuclear Energy
After recognizing the potential risks associated with nuclear energy, strict safety measures and regulations have been implemented worldwide. These safety measures include reactor design improvements, emergency preparedness, and ongoing monitoring of the plant operations. Regulatory bodies, such as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in the United States, play an important role in overseeing and enforcing safety standards.
Also Read: What is the Full Form of AEC?
Concerns of Nuclear Proliferation
The dual-use nature of nuclear technology raises concerns about the spread of nuclear weapons. The same nuclear technology used for the peaceful generation of electricity can be diverted for military purposes. International efforts, including the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), aim to help the proliferation of nuclear weapons and promote the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
Also Read: Dr. Homi J. Bhabha’s Education, Inventions & Discoveries
Also Read: How to Prepare for UPSC in 6 Months?
Future Prospects and Innovations of Nuclear Energy
The ongoing research and development into advanced reactor technologies are part of nuclear energy. Concepts like small modular reactors (SMRs) and Generation IV reactors aim to address safety, efficiency, and waste management concerns. Moreover, the exploration of nuclear fusion as a clean and virtually limitless energy source represents an innovation for future energy solutions.
Nuclear energy stands at the crossroads of possibility and peril, offering the possibility of addressing the world´s growing energy needs while posing important challenges. Striking a balance between utilising the benefits of nuclear power and alleviating its risks requires ongoing technological innovation, powerful safety measures, and international cooperation.
As we drive the complexities of perspective challenges of nuclear energy, the role of nuclear energy in the global energy mix remains a subject of ongoing debate and exploration.
Also Read: Essay on Science and Technology for Students: 100, 200, 350 Words
Ans. Nuclear energy is the energy released during nuclear reactions. Its importance lies in generating electricity, medical applications, and powering spacecraft.
Ans. Nuclear energy is exploited from the nucleus of atoms through processes like fission or fusion. It is a powerful and controversial energy source with applications in power generation and various technologies.
Ans. The five benefits of nuclear energy include: 1. Less greenhouse gas emissions 2. High energy density 3. Continuos power generation 4. Relatively low fuel consumption 5. Potential for reducing dependence on fossil fuels
Ans. Three important facts about nuclear energy: a. Nuclear fission releases a significant amount of energy. b. Nuclear power plants use controlled fission reactions to generate electricity. c. Nuclear fusion, combining atomic nuclei, is a potential future energy source.
Ans. Nuclear energy is considered best due to its low carbon footprint, high energy output, and potential to address energy needs. However, concerns about safety, radioactive waste, and proliferation risk are challenges that need careful consideration.
Related Articles
| | |
For more information on such interesting topics, visit our essay writing page and follow Leverage Edu.
Deepika Joshi
Deepika Joshi is an experienced content writer with educational and informative content expertise. She has hands-on experience in Education, Study Abroad and EdTech SaaS. Her strengths lie in conducting thorough research and analysis to provide accurate and up-to-date information to readers. She enjoys staying updated on new skills and knowledge, particularly in the education domain. In her free time, she loves to read articles, and blogs related to her field to expand her expertise further. In her personal life, she loves creative writing and aspires to connect with innovative people who have fresh ideas to offer.
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Contact no. *
Connect With Us
45,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. take the first step today..
Resend OTP in
Need help with?
Study abroad.
UK, Canada, US & More
IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More
Scholarship, Loans & Forex
Country Preference
New Zealand
Which English test are you planning to take?
Which academic test are you planning to take.
Not Sure yet
When are you planning to take the exam?
Already booked my exam slot
Within 2 Months
Want to learn about the test
Which Degree do you wish to pursue?
When do you want to start studying abroad.
January 2025
September 2025
What is your budget to study abroad?
How would you describe this article ?
Please rate this article
We would like to hear more.
Have something on your mind?
Make your study abroad dream a reality in January 2022 with
India's Biggest Virtual University Fair
Essex Direct Admission Day
Why attend .
Don't Miss Out
- Sustainable
- Energy Economy
- Energy Services
10 Advantages and Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy
Nuclear energy, lauded for its significant power-generating potential and relatively low carbon footprint, is a subject of intense debate due to its associated risks. It is efficient but potential accidents, radioactive waste disposal challenges, and the risk of weaponization are big concerns. These factors underscore the necessity of a comprehensive understanding of both the advantages and disadvantages of nuclear energy.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy
Nuclear Energy involves the release of energy from an atom’s nucleus , achieved through either nuclear fission or nuclear fusion. Power plants utilize this energy to generate electricity for various purposes.
The energy released from the compact nucleus of an atom is exceptionally high, owing to the strong force that binds the nucleus together. This energy is liberated through the process of nuclear fission, wherein the heavy nucleus of elements like uranium, plutonium, or thorium splits into lighter nuclei upon collision with a neutron. Uranium stands as the most commonly utilized material for producing nuclear energy. The site where nuclear fission occurs to create electricity is known as a nuclear power plant.
Nuclear energy is classified as a non-renewable energy source , primarily due to the finite nature of the materials used in its production. Now, let’s first take a look at how nuclear energy works, then we can move towards understanding the advantages and disadvantages of nuclear energy.
How Does Nuclear Energy Work?
Before learning about nuclear energy advantages and disadvantages, it’s important to know how nuclear energy works. A nuclear reactor functions similarly to other power plants, using a chain reaction to produce energy that converts water into steam . This steam, under pressure, drives a turbine connected to a generator that ultimately generates electricity.
The distinctive aspect lies in the method of heat production. Unlike fossil fuel power plants that burn coal, oil, or natural gas, nuclear energy plants generate heat through the process of splitting atoms, known as nuclear fission.
In a Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR), the high pressure within the reactor vessel prevents water from boiling. The super-heated water is channeled to a steam generator, comprising numerous small pipes. The heat in these pipes converts a separate water supply into steam, propelling the turbine. The water from the reactor is then circulated back, reheated, and reused. The steam from the turbine is subsequently cooled in a condenser, with the resulting water returning to the steam generator. This explains how nuclear energy works, now let’s explore the advantages and disadvantages of nuclear energy.
Advantages of Nuclear Energy
The advantages and disadvantages of nuclear energy are critical considerations in evaluating its capacity for efficient electricity generation and potential environmental and security risks. Nuclear energy offers the following advantages:
1. Enhanced Energy Capacity
- One kilogram of 4% enriched fuel-grade uranium can produce the equivalent of 100 tons of high-grade coal , replacing approximately 60 tons of oil consumption when a facility goes online.
- Provides a stable and reliable energy source compatible with grids worldwide.
2. Fuel Reusability
- Uranium-235, a common fuel in nuclear projects, can be reused after initial consumption , potentially leading to a future with zero waste .
- Thorium, another reprocessable option, allows for the reuse of spent waste, minimizing the need for future uranium mining.
3. Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction
- Nuclear energy aids in decreasing greenhouse gas emissions , as seen in Europe and Russia, resulting in a substantial reduction of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere.
- Promoting nuclear energy can effectively contribute to environmental sustainability in the developed world.
4. Economic Boost for Countries
- Nuclear energy serves as a critical sector for numerous countries, fostering energy independence and stable economic growth.
- Competitively priced with other forms of electricity generation, except where direct access to low-cost fossil fuels exists.
5. Exceptional Reliability of Facilities
- Nuclear power plants exhibit remarkable longevity , surpassing initial life expectancy estimates by 50%, with existing uranium reserves capable of meeting current energy needs for over a century.
- Advancements in fuel recycling technology hold the potential to extend the longevity of nuclear energy facilities further.
Also See: 5 Major Advantages and Disadvantages of Hydroelectric Energy
6. Safety Assurance
- Despite concerns about radiation, nuclear energy maintains one of the lowest mortality rates compared to other fuel sources, including coal-fired and eco-friendly alternatives like solar energy.
- Offers a viable energy source for communities requiring increased electricity production.
7. Manageable Costs
- Development costs of nuclear energy remain comparable to those of wind or solar power, while operational expenses are notably lower than fossil fuel alternatives.
- Front-end costs are significantly lower compared to natural gas and coal, making it economically feasible for most developed countries.
8. Proven and Reliable Resource
- With over 30 countries currently utilizing nuclear energy and comprising approximately 10% of global electricity production, it stands as a well-established and dependable energy source.
- Several countries, including Belgium, Slovakia, Ukraine, Hungary, and France, rely predominantly on nuclear power.
9. High Energy Efficiency and Power Density
- Nuclear energy demonstrates high efficiency, capable of generating electricity for up to 36 months from a single reaction , far surpassing the efficiency of traditional fossil fuels.
- Requires minimal fuel compared to other energy production methods, offering significantly higher electricity generation potential per unit of fuel. This includes an exponentially higher energy output compared to chemical reactions.
10. Versatile Applications
- While primarily used for electricity generation, nuclear power finds application across various sectors due to the stability and long-distance coverage of its energy output.
- Potential utilization in space and naval applications demonstrates the diverse capabilities of nuclear energy.
Now to fully understand the pros and cons of nuclear energy, let’s explore the points below.
Also Read: Hydrogen Energy Advantages and Disadvantages
Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy
Despite its low carbon emissions, nuclear energy poses significant drawbacks. Let’s learn about these drawbacks to fully grasp all about nuclear energy’s advantages and disadvantages:
1. Potential for Catastrophic Accidents
- Events like the Chernobyl disaster and the Fukushima incident underscore the risks of nuclear energy, leading to widespread health issues and environmental damage.
- Various accidents worldwide have caused substantial financial losses and long-term cleanup efforts.
2. Nuclear Energy’s Weaponization Potential
- Nuclear energy can be weaponized, with historical instances like the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki serving as grim reminders.
- The development of more powerful nuclear weapons raises concerns about preventing the technology from falling into the wrong hands.
3. Radioactive Waste Management Challenges
- While nuclear energy presents a cleaner energy source, it generates hazardous radioactive waste that poses significant long-term environmental risks.
- Disposing of nuclear waste incurs substantial costs, leading to financial burdens for governments and taxpayers.
4. Health Risks Associated with Exposure
- Nuclear energy production results in the release of ionizing radiation , potentially causing severe health issues, particularly affecting thyroid function and increasing the risk of cancer.
- Strict safety measures and protective gear are necessary for workers in nuclear facilities to minimize the risk of exposure.
Also See: 10 Ocean Energy Advantages and Disadvantages
5. Non-Renewable Resource Dependency
- Despite its clean-burning nature, nuclear energy relies on uranium and, to some extent, thorium, both of which are finite resources.
- The need for ongoing uranium reserves poses a challenge, particularly as some countries may face depleting stores within the next few decades.
6. Costly Long-Term Storage
- The storage and management of nuclear waste come with substantial financial burdens, often exceeding the initial construction costs of nuclear facilities.
- Inefficient management strategies and failed promises regarding waste collection contribute to the growing financial liability.
7. Environmental Impact of Uranium Mining
- Uranium mining and refining processes, including in-situ leach mining and open-pit mining , carry significant environmental consequences and high production costs.
- The environmental impact of these mining methods contributes to additional challenges in managing nuclear energy’s ecological footprint .
8. Inefficient Energy Transmission
- Inadequate infrastructure for efficient energy transmission results in considerable electricity losses during distribution , adding to the overall energy inefficiency of nuclear power.
- The high cost of upgrading transmission lines to minimize losses presents a significant financial challenge for many countries.
Also See: 4 Major Advantages and Disadvantages of Tidal Energy
9. Lack of Viable Alternatives
- The absence of a clear alternative energy plan poses a significant challenge if nuclear energy were to become obsolete.
- Transitioning away from nuclear energy presents substantial financial and logistical hurdles, putting pressure on future generations to find sustainable solutions.
10. Prolonged Construction Timelines
- Building new nuclear facilities can take over a decade , leading many countries to opt for faster energy solutions to meet immediate demand.
- The prolonged construction timelines contribute to the reliance on alternative energy sources, including fossil fuels, despite their associated environmental concerns.
This sums up the pros and cons of nuclear energy.
While acknowledging the cons of nuclear power such as radiation exposure and environmental harm, it remains a highly efficient and cost-effective electricity generation method. Hence, we need to balance its benefits and drawbacks by taking proactive measures, thus offering a promising pathway for the future.
Source: Advantages and Challenges of Nuclear Energy
Olivia is committed to green energy and works to help ensure our planet's long-term habitability. She takes part in environmental conservation by recycling and avoiding single-use plastic.
Related Posts
Do Closing Blinds Save Energy? Top 5 Blinds to Conserve Heat
Average Water Usage and Wastage Stats Per Person Per Day
What Size Solar Panel to Charge 12V Battery?
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.
- Clean energy
- Nuclear energy
- Top pros and cons of...
The top pros and cons of nuclear energy
- Share to LinkedIn
- Share to Facebook
- Jacob Marsh
As subject matter experts, we provide only objective information. We design every article to provide you with deeply-researched, factual, useful information so that you can make informed home electrification and financial decisions. We have:
Sourced the majority of our data from hundreds of thousands of quotes through our own marketplace.
Incorporated third-party data and information from primary sources, government agencies, educational institutions, peer-reviewed research, or well-researched nonprofit organizations.
Built our own database and rating system for solar equipment, including solar panels, inverters, and batteries.
We won't charge you anything to get quotes through our marketplace. Instead, installers and other service providers pay us a small fee to participate after we vet them for reliability and suitability. To learn more, read about how we make money and our Editorial Guidelines .
As with any energy source, renewable or non-renewable, there are pros and cons to using nuclear energy. We'll review some of these top benefits and drawbacks to keep in mind when comparing nuclear to other energy sources.
- 100% free to use, 100% online
- Access the lowest prices from installers near you
- Unbiased Energy Advisors ready to help
Top pros and cons of nuclear energy
Despite the limited development of nuclear power plants recently, nuclear energy still supplies about 20 percent of U.S. electricity. As with any energy source, it comes with various advantages and disadvantages. Here are just a few top ones to keep in mind:
Pros and cons of nuclear power
| Uranium is technically non-renewable | ||||||
| Small land footprint | Very high upfront costs | |||||
| High power output | Nuclear waste | |||||
| Reliable energy source | Malfunctions can be catastrophic |
| The Dukovany Power Plant, a typical light water reactor. (Source: ) |
According to the 2017 BP Statistical Review of World Energy, about 4.7% of the world's energy budget is dedicated to nuclear energy. [1] The utilization of nuclear power has been portrayed negatively in the media. Although there are severe consequences if a nuclear power plant goes awry, there are also many benefits associated with its usage. The purpose of this paper is to inform readers about the advantages and disadvantages of using nuclear power to create electrical energy.
Advantages of Nuclear Power
Most light water reactors (See Fig. 1) that make up the world's nuclear capacity create electricity at costs of between $0.025 and $0.07 USD per kilowatt-hour dependent upon the design and requirements of each reactor, and experiences many favorable variables such as government subsidies and research. [2] To put into perspective, in California, the wholesale price to produce electricity from natural gas is approximately $0.05 USD per kilowatt-hour, revealing that nuclear energy may or may not be as costly as other alternatives in certain geographical areas. In addition, nuclear energy by far has the lowest impact on the environment since it does not release any gases like carbon dioxide or methane, which are largely responsible for the greenhouse effect." [3] As a result, this differentiates nuclear energy from fossil fuels in that it does not produce negative carbon externalities as a byproduct, "though some greenhouse gases are released while transporting fuel or extracting energy from uranium." [3] The factor of scarcity is not of concern when it comes to the reactors fuel source, which is primarily uranium. There are roughly 5.5 million tonnes of uranium in the known reserves that could be mined at $130 USD per kilogram. [2] Currently, with the world's consumption of around 66,500 tonnes per year, there is about 80 years worth of fuel with the known reserves since the element is relatively abundant in the earth's crust. The main advantage to nuclear energy is that is it relatively low-cost and consistently runs on its full potential, making it the ideal source to power national grids. [2,4]
Disadvantages of Nuclear Power
The hindrance in the growth of nuclear energy is due to many complex reasons, and a major component is the nuclear waste. The further implementations of nuclear power are limited because although nuclear energy does not produce CO 2 the way fossil fuels do, there is still a toxic byproduct produced from uranium-fueled nuclear cycles: radioactive fission waste. 1 tonne of fresh fuel rod waste from a nuclear reactor would give you a fatal dose of radiation in 10 seconds if placed 3 meters away. Plutonium is also of concern, as it increases an exposed person's potential in developing liver, bone, or lung cancer. [5] There is also a negative political perception associated with nuclear plants and nuclear weapons, so expansive growth of nuclear energy is difficult to accomplish. In addition, nuclear power plants could also be ideal targets for terrorists due to the fissile plutonium components of the waste, which could be reused as bomb fuel. [2] Also a terrorist attack on a large reactor would cause a widespread radiation catastrophe at a scale similar to Chernobyl. The final disadvantage is the plant's concentrated level of capital. Although the fuel cost to produce power using nuclear energy is relatively low, there is still the necessity of having highly skilled workers to build, maintain and monitor the operations to ensure the safety and process of the plant.
© Jesse Kuet. The author warrants that the work is the author's own and that Stanford University provided no input other than typesetting and referencing guidelines. The author grants permission to copy, distribute and display this work in unaltered form, with attribution to the author, for noncommercial purposes only. All other rights, including commercial rights, are reserved to the author.
[1] " BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2017 ," British Petroleum, June 2017.
[2] Q. Schiermeier, "Energy Alternatives: Electricity without Carbon," Nature 454 , 816 (2008).
[3] T. Thomas, " "Advantages of Nuclear Energy Use ," Physics 241, Stanford University, Winter 2016.
[4] G. Cravens, Power to Save the World: The Truth About Nuclear Energy (Knopf, 2008).
[5] D. M. Taylor, "Environmental Plutonium in Humans," Appl. Radiat. Isotopes 46 , 1245 (1995).
- Net Zero Features
- Conscious Living Essentials
- Geothermal Energy Installers
- Planet Earth
- Climate Policy
- Sustainability
Nuclear Energy Advantages and Disadvantages
We are reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn affiliate commission.
When you think of nuclear energy, you might picture nuclear bombs and disasters like Chernobyl and Fukushima. Yet, nuclear energy is one of the cleanest power sources in the world. The production process, which involves splitting uranium or thorium atoms, produces heat that nuclear power plants convert into electricity. It’s completely carbon-free and incredibly efficient. Currently, nuclear energy provides roughly 10% of the world’s electricity, but that percentage will likely increase in the coming years.
The United States owns 96 operating reactors — or 30% of the global total. This year, the Biden administration plans to strengthen America’s world-leading nuclear program by providing $1.85 billion in funding. The budget proposal also includes $1 billion to preserve existing power plants and $60 million to support a mobile micro-reactor program.
This growing support shows that mindsets and opinions about nuclear energy are changing. However, it’s important to consider both the advantages and disadvantages of this energy source to better understand its place in the world — and the future.
Advantages of Nuclear Energy
There are plenty of advantages to nuclear energy, especially when you compare it to coal, oil and other fossil fuels. Ultimately, nuclear power is cleaner, more efficient and more affordable. A closer look will reveal just how beneficial this energy source is.
More Efficient Than Fossil Fuels
Nuclear power relies on nuclear fission, a primordial process that’s largely self-sustaining. Once workers fuel a plant with uranium, it will produce energy for 18 to 24 months before requiring more fuel. Plus, the fuel rods themselves can last up to six years.
Meanwhile, power plants that rely on fossil fuels require a continuous supply of fuel, which inevitably hikes up the demand for gas, oil and coal. Plus, they need more fuel than nuclear plants to produce the same amount of energy. Thus, nuclear outranks fossil fuels in both efficiency and proficiency.
Doesn’t Release Greenhouse Gases
One of the biggest advantages of nuclear energy is that it doesn’t produce any greenhouse gases. Instead, nuclear power plants release clouds full of harmless water vapor, which is infinitely better for both humans and the environment.
Currently, fossil fuel combustion accounts for 74% of total GHG emissions and 92% of anthropogenic carbon emissions in the U.S. Nuclear offers a clean alternative to fossil fuels and the plethora of pollutants they produce.
Low Operating Costs
Nuclear power plants are especially affordable to run, especially when compared to ones that rely on fossil fuels. That mean’s nuclear energy is cheaper to produce and use, making it a cost-effective choice for anyone who’s willing to make the initial investment. Operating costs include disposal and decommissioning costs, too, so nuclear is relatively easy to include in government spending budgets.
Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy
Despite its many advantages, there are a few drawbacks to investing in and relying on nuclear energy. Do the negatives outweigh the positives? It depends on who you ask, and whether they’d rather support the planet or short-term economic growth.
Expensive to Build
Sure, operating costs might be low, but the initial cost to build nuclear power plants is sky-high. Why? Nuclear fission relies on radioactive uranium or thorium for fuel, so the building’s design must comply with specific safety standards. Recent changes to rules and regulations have made plants safer but hiked up building costs , and even standardized designs aren’t helping. Thus, both renewables and fossil fuels end up being cheaper in terms of the initial investment.
Limited Fuel Supply
Eleven years ago, experts surmised that the world’s uranium supply would last 80 more years at the then-current rate of consumption. Since then, uranium output has generally risen , which means nuclear energy is a short-term solution, at best. Unless innovators can create nuclear fusion or build breeder reactors before the uranium supply dries up, humans will have no choice but to forgo nuclear power and make a complete switch to renewable energy.
Produces Radioactive Waste
While their overall output of pollution is low, nuclear plants’ radioactive waste generation is still worth mentioning. Once the reactor rods run out of fuel, they remain physically hot for about 10 years and dangerously radioactive for another 10,000. Consequently, many countries bury the rods deep underground where they have a lower chance of contaminating the environment. Still, accidents happen, and there have been previous cases of radioactive waste leaking or evaporating from holding tanks.
Securing a Sustainable Future
The nuclear energy landscape changes every day, with many countries planning to build dozens of plants within the next few years. Thanks to its efficiency, eco-friendliness and affordability, nuclear power will play a massive role in the transition to renewable energy. Even so, because plants are expensive to build, produce toxic waste and will eventually run out of fuel, they fail to provide a long-term solution to global energy needs or the climate crisis.
As humans seek a more sustainable future, nuclear will certainly serve as a stepping stone. It’s simply a matter of time before the phase-out period begins and renewables take center stage.
Thanks for subscribing! Please check your email for further instructions.
Like what you read? Join other Environment.co readers!
Get the latest updates on our planet by subscribing to the Environment.co newsletter!
About the author
All You Need to Know About Green Hydrogen and its Colorful Future
10 of the Longest Range Electric Cars
Conquering Industrial Water Waste
Rise of the Machines? Smart Home Pros and Cons
The Future of Factory Power: Exploring Initiatives for Industry Energy Efficiency
Driving Innovation: Accelerating Toward Sustainable Roads
Nuclear Energy Benefits Essay
- To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
- As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
- As a template for you assignment
Nuclear energy use has taken priority in many countries today. It is argued that it affects the environment negatively and can pose a great risk to human beings and their existence. However, it is the most cost effective and environmentally friendly way of generating electricity. In addition, the risks associated with the source of energy can be avoided. This essay will argue that nuclear energy is the most effective way of generating electricity.
One of the factors why nuclear energy is an effective source of energy is that it is cost effective. Electricity generated from nuclear energy is economical and saves cost when compared with other forms of electricity from renewable sources like sun, wind, biomass and water.
It is cost effective in the sense that the processes of conducting research and developing it receive government support in terms of finances. As result, research and development costs that are supposed to be incurred in producing nuclear energy are not reflected in electricity. In other renewable sources of electricity, funding is done by private bodies hence increasing the cost of electricity.
The other factor that makes nuclear energy cost effective is that the risks associated with this type of energy are passed on to all the citizens as opposed to a few individuals or companies that own nuclear plants. This is because there is usually legal liability underinsurance for the plants. The cost would have been very high if the companies that operate the plants were required to take insurance covers for dangers that occur at the plants (Time for Change, n.d).
Apart from cost effectiveness, nuclear energy is also environmentally friendly. Studies on energy impacts mostly focus on the impacts on the environment. Some impacts like displacement of people and interruptions caused on the land are not considered very important. Nuclear energy is environmentally friendly in that it does not emit greenhouse gases.
The operations of nuclear energy plants do not produce these gases which are associated with global warming. The emissions associated with nuclear energy cycle are indeed moderate hence nuclear power plants can instead be used to prevent global warming.
In addition, replacing coal with nuclear energy has many environmental benefits. The electricity supplied from nuclear energy throughout the world is only 14.8 percent. On the other hand, the energy supplied by coal is more than 40 percent. The fuel cycle generated when coal is used to produce energy is harmful to the environment.
In fact, it is categorized among energy sources that cause huge destruction to the environment. This leaves nuclear energy an environmentally friendly source of energy when compared with other renewable sources of energy (O’Sullivan, 2009).
During nuclear energy production, uranium nuclei are split without instances of pollution in the process. This is contrary to what happens in other energy production means which burn certain materials. For example, burning of coal to produce energy is associated with air pollution.
The different types of air pollution caused consequently lead to environmental issues which affect the health of human beings. For example, mercury produced during coal burning is harmful to the nervous system.
There are various ways that can be used to reduce the risks associated with nuclear energy. One of its risks is the harm that may arise from disposal of wastes produced during the processes of energy generation. The radioactive wastes produced during the processes are difficult to recycle or dispose using the normal disposal or recycling means.
One way of avoiding the risk associated with such wastes is by storing them in long term facilities which give them enough time to decay without being disturbed. By doing this, harmful isotopes are allowed to safely decay until they pose no risk to human lives (Lindsay, 2004).
The other way of reducing the risks associated with nuclear energy is conducting major improvements in nuclear energy plants. The major improvements include increasing safety levels in uranium mines. In addition, cleaner storage facilities are important in reducing the risks associated with nuclear energy. When these measures are combined with increased accuracy and versatility, nuclear energy turns out to be one of the best energy sources (Hagler, 2011).
Despite the objections that are raised regarding the use of nuclear energy, it is undoubtedly the most effective way of generating energy. When compared with other renewable ways of generating energy such as coal, nuclear energy has many benefits. For example, it is cost effective and environmentally friendly.
Hagler, A. (2011). Health Hazards from Energy Production: A Comparison of Nuclear and Coal Power . Web.
Lindsay, H. (2004). Environmental Policy Issues . Web.
O’Sullivan, L. (2009). The Environmental Effects of Nuclear as an Alternative Energy Source. Web.
Time for Change . (n.d). Cost advantage of nuclear energy . Web.
- Water Crisis in UAE
- Nuclear Energy Effectiveness
- Nuclear Power Provides Cheap and Clean Energy
- Nuclear Energy in Australia
- Electricity Production and Consumption in the US
- Urbanization and the Environment
- Fossil fuels have no future
- Effects of Global Warming: Currently and Future
- The Process of the Water Cycle
- Water Pollution Origins and Ways of Resolving
- Chicago (A-D)
- Chicago (N-B)
IvyPanda. (2018, June 26). Nuclear Energy Benefits. https://ivypanda.com/essays/nuclear-energy/
"Nuclear Energy Benefits." IvyPanda , 26 June 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/nuclear-energy/.
IvyPanda . (2018) 'Nuclear Energy Benefits'. 26 June.
IvyPanda . 2018. "Nuclear Energy Benefits." June 26, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/nuclear-energy/.
1. IvyPanda . "Nuclear Energy Benefits." June 26, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/nuclear-energy/.
Bibliography
IvyPanda . "Nuclear Energy Benefits." June 26, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/nuclear-energy/.
IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:
- Basic site functions
- Ensuring secure, safe transactions
- Secure account login
- Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
- Remembering privacy and security settings
- Analyzing site traffic and usage
- Personalized search, content, and recommendations
- Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda
Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.
Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.
Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:
- Remembering general and regional preferences
- Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers
Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .
To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.
Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .
- {{currentSearchSuggestions.title}}
- {{item.name}}
We improve the electricity bill for 9 out of 10 households
Take a Formidable decision.
Incredible savings by integrating renewable energy sources into your boiler or climate control system
Solar panels and self-consumption
You can now produce your own electrical energy.
Download the mobile app and sign up for Para Ti!
To enjoy the advantages of the Para Ti loyalty program, download Endesa Clients app on your mobile phone.
If you prefer to always view the website in English, please click here.
- Power Plants
Nuclear energy: what it is and its advantages and disadvantages
You must have heard about nuclear energy on numerous occasions, but do you know what it is and how we get it? The following article will explain its characteristics and how it works.
Nuclear power is always a matter of debate. Its use in past decades has generated numerous opinions, although it has also provided some very useful options for all kinds of everyday services.
It enables us to obtain electricity efficiently, which already makes it very interesting for our daily requirements. Would you like to know more details about the possibilities it offers us?
What is nuclear energy?
Nuclear energy is what we find in the nucleus of an atom . And what is an atom? The smallest particles into which we can divide the chemical elements we know.
An atom is made up of three subatomic particles: Neutrons , protons and electrons . They can be differentiated by their electric charge: Neutrons have no charge, protons have a positive charge and electrons have a negative charge . The atom is always neutral as it has the same number of protons and electrons. What binds neutrons and protons together in the nucleus is nuclear energy. And did you know? It is possible to release this energy to obtain electricity .
Now that you know the basic theory you will probably be starting to feel curious. When did Humanity start to be interested in atoms? We have to go back to Ancient Greece to find the atomist philosophers . This philosophical school was headed by Democritus of Abdera and believed that the universe was formed only by these small particles and emptiness. As a result of his theories, Democritus is considered to be one of the founding fathers of science .
The atomists did not have the means to prove their theories, but science has evolved and we now have a better understanding of atoms and what can be done with them. At the end of the 19th century, and during the 20th century, different atomic models emerged which have enabled us to try to explain the structure of these particles. Research progressed until we were able to put into practice methods that would enable us to make use of nuclear energy.
“The atom is made up of three subatomic particles: Neutrons, protons and electrons. They can be differentiated by their electric charge.”
How is nuclear energy obtained?
Nuclear energy is obtained by the disintegration of uranium atoms in nuclear power plants. Uranium is the main source of fuel for these installations. And why do we use this material? Because its instability generates reactions that nuclear power plants provoke to obtain energy. In some cases plutonium is also used.
There are two processes that generate nuclear energy: nuclear fission and nuclear fusion . A simple explanation would be to say that with both procedures the instability of the chemical element is provoked by separating (fission), or joining (fusion) the atoms. Fission occurs in nuclear power plants , and fusion occurs naturally .
Any method used will cause collisions between the subatomic particles and a loss of mass, releasing a large amount of heat energy. With fission in a power plant, this energy is converted into steam, and this starts a turbine attached to an alternator and as a result, electricity is generated.
Types of nuclear energy
As you have seen, there are nuclear fission and nuclear fusion processes to obtain energy. You have already seen that nuclear fission is the process undertaken in nuclear power plants. And what about fusion ? Is it feasible? Let's take a closer look at both possibilities for obtaining nuclear energy.
Energy from nuclear fission:
We obtain energy from nuclear fission by dividing an atom into others that are lighter. This is done in power stations by provoking nuclear reactions. The reaction seeks to make the atom unstable through collisions of subatomic particles.
To make this easier to understand: The atom receives impacts by neutrons until one of them manages to coincide with the nucleus. This causes the atom to divide and energy is liberated , as well as neutrons and gamma rays.
Under the right conditions, this effect can provoke a chain reaction as a result of the neutrons released, providing they manage to impact with the new nuclei that emerge after the division of the atom.
Energy from nuclear fusion:
Energy from nuclear fusion arises from the union of two light atoms to create a heavy atom. This process releases energy that can be harnessed.
To give you an idea, this phenomenon occurs naturally and constantly in the sun , due to the fusion of hydrogen atoms. When they bond a new helium atom is created that emits a large amount of energy.
Is there a way to imitate this process using today's technology? Progress is being made. Nuclear fusion requires very high temperatures . The optimisation and creation of plants prepared for this process will beneficial for the environment. The replacement of uranium by hydrogen, an inexhaustible and clean source , is just one example.
Nuclear energy in Spain
Nuclear energy in Spain dates back to 1969, with the inauguration in Guadalajara of the José Cabrera power plant , better known as Zorita . This plant was in operation until 2006. At the moment, we have seven operational reactors distributed throughout the country, all of them commissioned during the eighties.
Currently, more than 20% of the electricity consumed in Spain originates from the nuclear energy generated in these power plants. All together they represent 6.5% of installed electrical power in the country.
In addition to nuclear power plants, Spain also has a factory producing nuclear fuel in Salamanca. This type of installation controls the supply, storage and distribution of uranium. The waste generated is deposited in a radioactive waste storage centre located in the province of Córdoba.
Advantages and disadvantages of nuclear energy
As we said at the beginning, this energy provokes intense debates and there are opinions for all tastes.
Disadvantages of nuclear energy:
Nuclear power generates waste from the material used and there are concerns about possible accidents or leaks , since uranium is not a renewable source , at least not for now. One of the drawbacks of this material is its high radioactivity , as well as having a very long half life.
Advantages of nuclear energy:
However, the advantages of nuclear power , outweigh the disadvantages. It does not produce greenhouse gases . It is a year-round energy that is constant and can be planned . Operating costs are also low . If to this we add that it enables high energy production with low fuel consumption , we are talking about efficient energy with clear prospects for the future .
Steps are being taken with regard to its recycling . Some European countries, China, Russia and Japan now have the means to reprocess uranium . Storage installations guarantee safe storage of the material. The power plants are also subject to very strict regulations and employ highly qualified personnel .
“More than 20% of the electricity consumed in Spain originates from nuclear energy.”
As you can see, we are trying to help you learn with us about the different ways of obtaining energy for your daily lives. There are also small actions you can take in everyday life that contribute to the welfare of the environment as a result of green energies like Endesa Única .
Your commitment and that of millions of people, together with technological and scientific progress, will help us achieve responsible and clean use of the energies available to us. The future stands before you, and you have a chance to play a leading role in a new way of doing things.
Related Content
How electricity is generated
Distributed generation: Challenges and opportunities in Spain and Latin America
Biomass energy: what it is, how it works and its advantages
Updated 3 months ago
The pros and cons of nuclear energy in 2024
Written by Jamie Smith , Edited by Catherine Lane
For decades, there has been a huge debate about whether to utilize nuclear energy. Despite its controversy, the U.S. Energy Information Association estimates that nuclear energy still makes up almost 20% of all the energy generation in the country.
Nuclear energy has several advantages – it gives off zero carbon emissions, creates a huge job market, is a low-cost source, and more!
But it does come with some huge disadvantages – such as its negative environmental impact, it's a non-renewable source, and the power plants (where nuclear energy is harnessed) pose risks for nuclear disasters!
Pros and cons of nuclear power
Nuclear power is a low-cost energy source, it’s reliable, the industry creates jobs, it produces zero-carbon emissions, and has a high energy density.
Nuclear power cons include the negative environmental impact it has, it’s water-intensive, it poses risks of nuclear accidents, it produces radioactive waste, and it’s a non-renewable energy source.
Advantages of nuclear power
There has been a lot of negativity surrounding the use of nuclear energy, but the power source has several benefits.
Low-cost energy
The cost of nuclear energy has gone down tremendously in the last decade, dropping to $29.13 per megawatt as of 2021.
This means a single kWh of nuclear energy only costs $0.03 to produce!
Along with the power itself being cheap, nuclear energy also has low operating costs. The only expensive part of nuclear energy is building the power plants to store it all.
Reliable power source
Nuclear energy is a reliable power source because it can be generated anytime.
Unlike solar power, where you need the sun to shine , nuclear power doesn’t rely on weather. A nuclear power plant can produce energy nonstop, and you won’t have to worry about lower output or delays in production.
Creates jobs
Nuclear power is one of the largest energy sources known to man, and it creates an entire industry of workers.
A single nuclear power plant employs between 400 and 700 employees.
Salaries to work in this industry are 30% higher than the U.S. average . So, not only is there a promising job market, but there is also the potential for excellent pay.
Zero-carbon emissions
Unlike fossil fuels , nuclear energy does not release any harmful carbon emissions into the atmosphere.
In fact, the amount of nuclear power generated in one year saves 470 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions from being released into the atmosphere. According to the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), that’s the equivalent of taking 100 million passenger vehicles off the road.
Excess carbon emissions are one of the leading causes of climate change. Therefore, the less carbon and greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere, the better.
High energy density
The amount of energy released from a nuclear power reaction is estimated to be ten million times greater than the amount released from fossil fuels.
The amount of nuclear fuel required in a nuclear power plant is much lower than in other types of power plants. Having this much energy production contributes to the low cost of nuclear energy. One power plant alone can produce thousands of megawatts of energy.
Disadvantages of nuclear energy
The advantages of nuclear energy make the source sound very appealing, but there are a few significant drawbacks.
Environmental impact
Nuclear energy releasing zero carbon emissions sounds great on the surface, but nuclear power still has a substantial negative impact on the environment, mainly through mining and water discharge.
Uranium is used to produce nuclear energy and is obtained by mining. Mining of any kind has negative environmental impacts. Mining uranium, in particular, is known to release arsenic and radon into the surrounding area – which can seriously affect the health of anyone living close to uranium mines.
Also, since these power plants rely on water, they are usually built by lakes or oceans. Nuclear power plants largely affect any wildlife living in bodies of water through something called ‘ thermal pollution.’ Thermal pollution is a rapid change in temperature in a natural body of water. Thus, when hot water from power plants is dumped into these lakes or oceans, the rapid temperature increase can harm the plant and animal ecosystems living in them. Water intensive
Nuclear power plants rely heavily on water as they use a lot of it to produce energy. In 2015, the United States consumed 320 billion gallons of water to generate nuclear power.
As water continues to become scarce , especially in the face of climate change, this enormous water consumption could become unsustainable.
Risk of nuclear accidents
Although nuclear power plants have strict safety measures in place, there is always the risk of a nuclear accident.
A meltdown at a nuclear plant can have a catastrophic impact on the surrounding areas. We know this because it’s happened at different points in history – take horrific events like the Fukushima disaster, Chernobyl, and Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania, for example.
In the event of a nuclear meltdown, harmful radiation can leak. Exposure to harmful radiation is detrimental to the environment and human health. The Chernobyl disaster wiped out an entire town due to radiation exposure and caused mass casualties.
It’s important to remember that these events are very rare, but the potential disaster is so great that it’s most people’s number one reason against nuclear power.
Radioactive waste
Radioactive waste is a byproduct that comes from nuclear reactors. Radioactive hazardous waste remains dangerous to human health for thousands of years.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) governs how it is handled, transported, stored, and disposed of to protect human health and the environment.
However, the more this waste is accumulated, the more of an issue it will become to store it. Plus, if there is a compromise in the storage facility (such as a leak), the effects of the radioactive material could be detrimental to surrounding areas.
Non-renewable energy source
A renewable energy source is a source of energy that is not depleted when it is used. In simpler terms, a renewable energy source will never run out.
Examples of renewable energy include wind power and solar energy because the sun's rays and the earth's wind won't run out in this lifetime.
This is not the case for nuclear power. The fuel used in nuclear reactors, uranium, is a finite resource. As we continue to mine uranium, we deplete the amount that is available, and it cannot be replenished within a human lifetime.
The current uranium supply is estimated to be consumed by the end of the century, and new sources of uranium are difficult to find. If the demand for uranium increases and the supply does not keep up, the price for the source can skyrocket – with sources predicting the price to double as soon as 2030. Higher uranium prices would mean nuclear power would no longer be such a cheap source of energy.
The greener solution: Solar energy
Although nuclear energy production has zero carbon emissions, it’s not necessarily the most environmentally friendly solution to produce electricity. On top of that, nuclear power plants are a risky business.
Invest in a solar energy system to participate in a safer and cleaner way to produce electricity ! You can use solar panels to reduce your monthly electricity bill to zero! Plus, when you pair your solar system with energy storage , you can power your home even when the sun isn’t shining.
Jamie is a Content Writer and researcher at SolarReviews. A recent graduate of La Salle University in Philadelphia, Jamie earned her B.S. in communications with a concentration in journalism, mass media, and public relations. Jamie has previously worked at a marketing company where she had the opportunity to highlight and promote small business owners through long-form stories and interviews. With a deep-rooted passion for creativity, Jamie stri...
Related articles
/
The 3,122-megawatt Civaux Nuclear Power Plant in France, which opened in 1997. GUILLAUME SOUVANT / AFP / Getty Images
Why Nuclear Power Must Be Part of the Energy Solution
By Richard Rhodes • July 19, 2018
Many environmentalists have opposed nuclear power, citing its dangers and the difficulty of disposing of its radioactive waste. But a Pulitzer Prize-winning author argues that nuclear is safer than most energy sources and is needed if the world hopes to radically decrease its carbon emissions.
In the late 16th century, when the increasing cost of firewood forced ordinary Londoners to switch reluctantly to coal, Elizabethan preachers railed against a fuel they believed to be, literally, the Devil’s excrement. Coal was black, after all, dirty, found in layers underground — down toward Hell at the center of the earth — and smelled strongly of sulfur when it burned. Switching to coal, in houses that usually lacked chimneys, was difficult enough; the clergy’s outspoken condemnation, while certainly justified environmentally, further complicated and delayed the timely resolution of an urgent problem in energy supply.
For too many environmentalists concerned with global warming, nuclear energy is today’s Devil’s excrement. They condemn it for its production and use of radioactive fuels and for the supposed problem of disposing of its waste. In my judgment, their condemnation of this efficient, low-carbon source of baseload energy is misplaced. Far from being the Devil’s excrement, nuclear power can be, and should be, one major component of our rescue from a hotter, more meteorologically destructive world.
Like all energy sources, nuclear power has advantages and disadvantages. What are nuclear power’s benefits? First and foremost, since it produces energy via nuclear fission rather than chemical burning, it generates baseload electricity with no output of carbon, the villainous element of global warming. Switching from coal to natural gas is a step toward decarbonizing, since burning natural gas produces about half the carbon dioxide of burning coal. But switching from coal to nuclear power is radically decarbonizing, since nuclear power plants release greenhouse gases only from the ancillary use of fossil fuels during their construction, mining, fuel processing, maintenance, and decommissioning — about as much as solar power does, which is about 4 to 5 percent as much as a natural gas-fired power plant.
Nuclear power releases less radiation into the environment than any other major energy source.
Second, nuclear power plants operate at much higher capacity factors than renewable energy sources or fossil fuels. Capacity factor is a measure of what percentage of the time a power plant actually produces energy. It’s a problem for all intermittent energy sources. The sun doesn’t always shine, nor the wind always blow, nor water always fall through the turbines of a dam.
In the United States in 2016, nuclear power plants, which generated almost 20 percent of U.S. electricity, had an average capacity factor of 92.3 percent , meaning they operated at full power on 336 out of 365 days per year. (The other 29 days they were taken off the grid for maintenance.) In contrast , U.S. hydroelectric systems delivered power 38.2 percent of the time (138 days per year), wind turbines 34.5 percent of the time (127 days per year) and solar electricity arrays only 25.1 percent of the time (92 days per year). Even plants powered with coal or natural gas only generate electricity about half the time for reasons such as fuel costs and seasonal and nocturnal variations in demand. Nuclear is a clear winner on reliability.
Third, nuclear power releases less radiation into the environment than any other major energy source. This statement will seem paradoxical to many readers, since it’s not commonly known that non-nuclear energy sources release any radiation into the environment. They do. The worst offender is coal, a mineral of the earth’s crust that contains a substantial volume of the radioactive elements uranium and thorium. Burning coal gasifies its organic materials, concentrating its mineral components into the remaining waste, called fly ash. So much coal is burned in the world and so much fly ash produced that coal is actually the major source of radioactive releases into the environment.
Anti-nuclear activists protest the construction of a nuclear power station in Seabrook, New Hampshire in 1977. AP Photo
In the early 1950s, when the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission believed high-grade uranium ores to be in short supply domestically, it considered extracting uranium for nuclear weapons from the abundant U.S. supply of fly ash from coal burning. In 2007, China began exploring such extraction, drawing on a pile of some 5.3 million metric tons of brown-coal fly ash at Xiaolongtang in Yunnan. The Chinese ash averages about 0.4 pounds of triuranium octoxide (U3O8), a uranium compound, per metric ton. Hungary and South Africa are also exploring uranium extraction from coal fly ash.
What are nuclear’s downsides? In the public’s perception, there are two, both related to radiation: the risk of accidents, and the question of disposal of nuclear waste.
There have been three large-scale accidents involving nuclear power reactors since the onset of commercial nuclear power in the mid-1950s: Three-Mile Island in Pennsylvania, Chernobyl in Ukraine, and Fukushima in Japan.
Studies indicate even the worst possible accident at a nuclear plant is less destructive than other major industrial accidents.
The partial meltdown of the Three-Mile Island reactor in March 1979, while a disaster for the owners of the Pennsylvania plant, released only a minimal quantity of radiation to the surrounding population. According to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission :
“The approximately 2 million people around TMI-2 during the accident are estimated to have received an average radiation dose of only about 1 millirem above the usual background dose. To put this into context, exposure from a chest X-ray is about 6 millirem and the area’s natural radioactive background dose is about 100-125 millirem per year… In spite of serious damage to the reactor, the actual release had negligible effects on the physical health of individuals or the environment.”
The explosion and subsequent burnout of a large graphite-moderated, water-cooled reactor at Chernobyl in 1986 was easily the worst nuclear accident in history. Twenty-nine disaster relief workers died of acute radiation exposure in the immediate aftermath of the accident. In the subsequent three decades, UNSCEAR — the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, composed of senior scientists from 27 member states — has observed and reported at regular intervals on the health effects of the Chernobyl accident. It has identified no long-term health consequences to populations exposed to Chernobyl fallout except for thyroid cancers in residents of Belarus, Ukraine and western Russia who were children or adolescents at the time of the accident, who drank milk contaminated with 131iodine, and who were not evacuated. By 2008, UNSCEAR had attributed some 6,500 excess cases of thyroid cancer in the Chernobyl region to the accident, with 15 deaths. The occurrence of these cancers increased dramatically from 1991 to 1995, which researchers attributed mostly to radiation exposure. No increase occurred in adults.
The Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, located near Avila Beach, California, will be decommissioned starting in 2024. Pacific Gas and Electric
“The average effective doses” of radiation from Chernobyl, UNSCEAR also concluded , “due to both external and internal exposures, received by members of the general public during 1986-2005 [were] about 30 mSv for the evacuees, 1 mSv for the residents of the former Soviet Union, and 0.3 mSv for the populations of the rest of Europe.” A sievert is a measure of radiation exposure, a millisievert is one-one-thousandth of a sievert. A full-body CT scan delivers about 10-30 mSv. A U.S. resident receives an average background radiation dose, exclusive of radon, of about 1 mSv per year.
The statistics of Chernobyl irradiations cited here are so low that they must seem intentionally minimized to those who followed the extensive media coverage of the accident and its aftermath. Yet they are the peer-reviewed products of extensive investigation by an international scientific agency of the United Nations. They indicate that even the worst possible accident at a nuclear power plant — the complete meltdown and burnup of its radioactive fuel — was yet far less destructive than other major industrial accidents across the past century. To name only two: Bhopal, in India, where at least 3,800 people died immediately and many thousands more were sickened when 40 tons of methyl isocyanate gas leaked from a pesticide plant; and Henan Province, in China, where at least 26,000 people drowned following the failure of a major hydroelectric dam in a typhoon. “Measured as early deaths per electricity units produced by the Chernobyl facility (9 years of operation, total electricity production of 36 GWe-years, 31 early deaths) yields 0.86 death/GWe-year),” concludes Zbigniew Jaworowski, a physician and former UNSCEAR chairman active during the Chernobyl accident. “This rate is lower than the average fatalities from [accidents involving] a majority of other energy sources. For example, the Chernobyl rate is nine times lower than the death rate from liquefied gas… and 47 times lower than from hydroelectric stations.”
Nuclear waste disposal, although a continuing political problem, is not any longer a technological problem.
The accident in Japan at Fukushima Daiichi in March 2011 followed a major earthquake and tsunami. The tsunami flooded out the power supply and cooling systems of three power reactors, causing them to melt down and explode, breaching their confinement. Although 154,000 Japanese citizens were evacuated from a 12-mile exclusion zone around the power station, radiation exposure beyond the station grounds was limited. According to the report submitted to the International Atomic Energy Agency in June 2011:
“No harmful health effects were found in 195,345 residents living in the vicinity of the plant who were screened by the end of May 2011. All the 1,080 children tested for thyroid gland exposure showed results within safe limits. By December, government health checks of some 1,700 residents who were evacuated from three municipalities showed that two-thirds received an external radiation dose within the normal international limit of 1 mSv/year, 98 percent were below 5 mSv/year, and 10 people were exposed to more than 10 mSv… [There] was no major public exposure, let alone deaths from radiation.”
Nuclear waste disposal, although a continuing political problem in the U.S., is not any longer a technological problem. Most U.S. spent fuel, more than 90 percent of which could be recycled to extend nuclear power production by hundreds of years, is stored at present safely in impenetrable concrete-and-steel dry casks on the grounds of operating reactors, its radiation slowly declining.
An activist in March 2017 demanding closure of the Fessenheim Nuclear Power Plant in France. Authorities announced in April that they will close the facility by 2020. SEBASTIEN BOZON / AFP / Getty Images
The U.S. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, New Mexico currently stores low-level and transuranic military waste and could store commercial nuclear waste in a 2-kilometer thick bed of crystalline salt, the remains of an ancient sea. The salt formation extends from southern New Mexico all the way northeast to southwestern Kansas. It could easily accommodate the entire world’s nuclear waste for the next thousand years.
Finland is even further advanced in carving out a permanent repository in granite bedrock 400 meters under Olkiluoto, an island in the Baltic Sea off the nation’s west coast. It expects to begin permanent waste storage in 2023.
A final complaint against nuclear power is that it costs too much. Whether or not nuclear power costs too much will ultimately be a matter for markets to decide, but there is no question that a full accounting of the external costs of different energy systems would find nuclear cheaper than coal or natural gas.
Nuclear power is not the only answer to the world-scale threat of global warming. Renewables have their place; so, at least for leveling the flow of electricity when renewables vary, does natural gas. But nuclear deserves better than the anti-nuclear prejudices and fears that have plagued it. It isn’t the 21st century’s version of the Devil’s excrement. It’s a valuable, even an irreplaceable, part of the solution to the greatest energy threat in the history of humankind.
Related Articles
Slowly but surely, u.s. school buses are starting to electrify.
By Jonathan Mingle
With Hotter, Drier Weather, California’s Joshua Trees Are in Trouble
By Jim Robbins
On Gulf Coast, an Activist Rallies Her Community Against Gas Exports
By Jocelyn C. Zuckerman
More From E360
Fortress conservation: can a congo tribe return to its forest, food & agriculture, how agroforestry could help revitalize america’s corn belt, biodiversity, e360 film contest winner, a solitary herder cares for his goats and the bay area hills, as ‘doomsday’ glacier melts, can an artificial barrier save it, e360 film contest, for 60,000 years, australia’s first nations have put fire to good use, faced with heavier rains, cities scramble to control polluted runoff, in montana’s northern plains, swift foxes are back from the brink, as canadian river shrivels, northern communities call for a highway, in warming world, global heat deaths are grossly undercounted, the ‘internet of animals’ could transform what we know about wildlife.
- Student Opportunities
About Hoover
Located on the campus of Stanford University and in Washington, DC, the Hoover Institution is the nation’s preeminent research center dedicated to generating policy ideas that promote economic prosperity, national security, and democratic governance.
- The Hoover Story
- Hoover Timeline & History
- Mission Statement
- Vision of the Institution Today
- Key Focus Areas
- About our Fellows
- Research Programs
- Annual Reports
- Hoover in DC
- Fellowship Opportunities
- Visit Hoover
- David and Joan Traitel Building & Rental Information
- Newsletter Subscriptions
- Connect With Us
Hoover scholars form the Institution’s core and create breakthrough ideas aligned with our mission and ideals. What sets Hoover apart from all other policy organizations is its status as a center of scholarly excellence, its locus as a forum of scholarly discussion of public policy, and its ability to bring the conclusions of this scholarship to a public audience.
- Russell A. Berman
- Robert Service
- Arun Majumdar
- H.R. McMaster
- Justin Grimmer
- China's Global Sharp Power Project
- Economic Policy Group
- History Working Group
- Hoover Education Success Initiative
- National Security Task Force
- National Security, Technology & Law Working Group
- Middle East and the Islamic World Working Group
- Military History/Contemporary Conflict Working Group
- Renewing Indigenous Economies Project
- State & Local Governance
- Strengthening US-India Relations
- Technology, Economics, and Governance Working Group
- Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region
Books by Hoover Fellows
Economics Working Papers
Hoover Education Success Initiative | The Papers
- Hoover Fellows Program
- National Fellows Program
- Student Fellowship Program
- Veteran Fellowship Program
- Congressional Fellowship Program
- Media Fellowship Program
- Silas Palmer Fellowship
- Economic Fellowship Program
Throughout our over one-hundred-year history, our work has directly led to policies that have produced greater freedom, democracy, and opportunity in the United States and the world.
- Determining America’s Role in the World
- Answering Challenges to Advanced Economies
- Empowering State and Local Governance
- Revitalizing History
- Confronting and Competing with China
- Revitalizing American Institutions
- Reforming K-12 Education
- Understanding Public Opinion
- Understanding the Effects of Technology on Economics and Governance
- Energy & Environment
- Health Care
- Immigration
- International Affairs
- Key Countries / Regions
- Law & Policy
- Politics & Public Opinion
- Science & Technology
- Security & Defense
- State & Local
- Books by Fellows
- Published Works by Fellows
- Working Papers
- Congressional Testimony
- Hoover Press
- PERIODICALS
- The Caravan
- China's Global Sharp Power
- Economic Policy
- History Lab
- Hoover Education
- Global Policy & Strategy
- Middle East and the Islamic World
- Military History & Contemporary Conflict
- Renewing Indigenous Economies
- State and Local Governance
- Technology, Economics, and Governance
Hoover scholars offer analysis of current policy challenges and provide solutions on how America can advance freedom, peace, and prosperity.
- China Global Sharp Power Weekly Alert
- Email newsletters
- Hoover Daily Report
- Subscription to Email Alerts
- Periodicals
- California on Your Mind
- Defining Ideas
- Hoover Digest
- Video Series
- Uncommon Knowledge
- Battlegrounds
- GoodFellows
- Hoover Events
- Capital Conversations
- Hoover Book Club
- AUDIO PODCASTS
- Matters of Policy & Politics
- Economics, Applied
- Free Speech Unmuted
- Secrets of Statecraft
- Capitalism and Freedom in the 21st Century
- Libertarian
- Library & Archives
Support Hoover
Learn more about joining the community of supporters and scholars working together to advance Hoover’s mission and values.
What is MyHoover?
MyHoover delivers a personalized experience at Hoover.org . In a few easy steps, create an account and receive the most recent analysis from Hoover fellows tailored to your specific policy interests.
Watch this video for an overview of MyHoover.
Log In to MyHoover
Forgot Password
Don't have an account? Sign up
Have questions? Contact us
- Support the Mission of the Hoover Institution
- Subscribe to the Hoover Daily Report
- Follow Hoover on Social Media
Make a Gift
Your gift helps advance ideas that promote a free society.
- About Hoover Institution
- Meet Our Fellows
- Focus Areas
- Research Teams
- Library & Archives
Library & archives
Events, news & press.
The Benefits Of Nuclear Power
It won’t solve our energy problems, but our energy problems can’t be solved without it.
The following essay is excerpted from the foreword to Keeping the Lights on at America's Nuclear Power Plants , a new book from the Hoover Institution’s Shultz-Stephenson Task Force on Energy Policy. This work is part of the task force’s Reinventing Nuclear Power research series.
Nuclear power alone will not solve our energy problems. But we do not think they can be solved without it. This is the crux of our concerns and why we are offering this book. It describes the challenges nuclear power is facing today and what might be done about them.
One of us, between other jobs, built nuclear plants for a living; between other jobs, the other helped make them safer. In many respects, this is a personal topic for us both. But here are some facts:
We know that our country’s dominance in civilian nuclear power has been a key part of America’s ability to set norms and rules not just for power plants in less stable places around the world but also for the control of nuclear weapon proliferation. We know that it’s an important technology-intensive export industry too: America invented the technology, and the United States today remains the world’s largest nuclear power generator, with nearly a quarter of global plants (more if you count the hundred power reactors aboard our navy ships at sea). Domestically, we know that nuclear power gives us reliable electricity supply at scale, supplying one-fifth of all of our power production and that nearly two- thirds of our country’s pollution and carbon-dioxide-free energy comes from these facilities.
There are known risks and real costs to nuclear too, of course, but on balance we believe that the benefits for the country come out well ahead. Historically, much of the national nuclear enterprise has rested on the backs of the US federal government (and military) as well as on the ratepayers of the electric utilities who own or operate these facilities. The question today is if—and how—those same players will be able to shoulder that responsibility in the future.
When we first started looking into the nuclear question as part of our energy work at the Hoover Institution a few years ago through the Shultz-Stephenson Task Force on Energy Policy, we had our eyes toward the future: What were the prospects and roadblocks for a new generation of small, modular nuclear reactors? How about the licensing framework for advanced, next-generation plant designs? Could a new entrepreneurial portfolio approach help break through the nuclear fusion barrier? We wanted to know what it would take to “reinvent nuclear power.” Soon enough, though, it became clear that it would not be enough to reinvent the future of nuclear power; if we don’t want to make the commitment to finance and run the mature and already depreciated light water nuclear reactors of today effectively, we won’t have the option to make that choice tomorrow.
Nothing in energy happens in isolation, so nuclear power should be viewed in its larger context. In fact, we are in a new energy position in America today.
First, security. New supplies of oil and gas have come online throughout the country. This not only has reduced our imports but also given us the flexibility in our production that makes price fixing cartels such as OPEC weak.
Prices are falling too, not just in the well known oil and gas sectors, the result again of American ingenuity and relentless commercialization efforts in fracking and horizontal drilling, but in new energy technologies as well. Research and development in areas such as wind and solar or electric vehicles are driving down those costs faster than the scientists expected, though there is still substantial room to go. We also have made huge strides since the 1970s Arab oil crises in the more efficient—or thoughtful—use of energy and are in a much better position energy-wise financially and competitively because of it.
Meanwhile there is the environment. The good news is that we’ve already made a lot of progress. As anyone who experienced Los Angeles smog in the 1960s and 1970s can attest, the Clean Air Act has been huge for the air we breathe. On carbon dioxide emissions, the progress is mixed, but the influx of cheap natural gas, energy efficiency, and a growing menu of clean energy technologies suggest promise.
Our takeaway from all of this is that for perhaps the first time in modern history, we find ourselves with breathing room on the energy front. We are no longer simply struggling to keep the lights on or to keep from going broke while doing so. What will we then choose to do with that breathing room?
To put a finer point on it: America needs to ask itself if it’s acceptable to lose its nuclear power capability by the midpoint of this century. If so, then, plant by plant, our current road may take us there. Some would be happy with that result. Those that would not should understand that changing course is likely to require deliberate actions.
What would we be giving up if we forgot nuclear power?
An environmentalist might note that we’d be losing a technology that does not pollute the air or water. Radioactivity is a cultural and emotional concern for many people, but nuclear power produces a relatively small amount of such waste—at a predictable rate, with known characteristics, and with $30 billion in disposal costs already paid for. Perhaps surprisingly, nuclear power production actually releases one hundred times less radiation into the surrounding environment than does coal power. Overall, with a long track record, the rate of human injury caused by nuclear power production is the lowest of any power generation technology, including renewable resources.
Jobs are increasingly discussed in energy, as they have long been in other business policy. Nuclear power plants each employ about six hundred people, about ten times more than an equivalent natural gas plant. Many nuclear workers are midcareer military veterans with few other outlets for their specialized skills—one US nuclear utility reported last year that a third of all new hires at nuclear facilities were veterans, Often intentionally located in rural areas, nuclear plants are major economic inputs to sixty small towns and cities across America. The nuclear power technology and manufacturing supply chain is a global export business for domestic businesses—not just for multinationals but also closely held nuclear-rated component suppliers, forgers, and contractors.
Someone concerned with security can appreciate that the fuel for nuclear power plants can be provided entirely from friendly suppliers, with low price volatility, and long-term supplies stored on-site and not subject to weather disruptions. Existing nuclear power plants use mature technologies with a long experience of domestic expertise in operations, oversight, and regulation. More broadly, a well-functioning domestic civil nuclear “ecosystem” is intertwined with our space and military nuclear capabilities, such as the reactors that power our aircraft carriers and submarines.
Finally, we shouldn’t discount that nuclear power plants are today being built at an unprecedented rate by developing countries in Asia and the Middle East, driven by power demands for their growing industries and increasingly wealthy populations. Those new plants are as likely to be built and supplied by international competitors as they are our own domestic businesses and their employees. The United States has so far held a dominant position in preserving global safety and proliferation norms owing to the strength of our domestic nuclear capabilities. Looking forward, new nuclear power technologies are available that could improve plants’ performance and the affordability of the power they generate. But tomorrow’s nuclear technologies directly depend on a continuation of today’s nuclear workforce and know-how.
In today’s American energy system, our biggest challenges are now human, not machine. Nuclear power illustrates this: while these generators have sat producing a steady stream of electrons, year by year, the country and markets have shifted around them. As long as we keep the gas pedal down on energy research and development—which is important for the long term—our country’s universities and research labs will ensure that new technologies keep coming down the pipeline as fast as we can use them. Often what is holding us back now is a lack of strategy and the willingness to make the political and bureaucratic changes necessary to carry one out. Technology and markets are moving faster than governments.
Nuclear power operators after Chernobyl and Three Mile Island were famously described as being “hostages of each other.” Any mistake made by one would reflect on all of the others. In many ways, this was an opportunity that became the basis for the American operators’ effective program of industry self-regulation. Today that phrase may have a new meaning. In recent years, the country’s energy industry has become unfortunately politicized, with many of the same sorts of identity- and values-based appeals that have come to dominate our political campaigns.
Technologies or techniques are singled out for tribal attack or support, limited by a zero-sum mindset. In truth, the energy system is not something that can be won. Instead, it’s more like gardening: something that you have to keep working at and tending to. Fans of gas or nuclear, electric cars or oil exports, fracking or rooftop solar—in the end, all are linked by common markets and governments. Each shot red in anger ricochets through the system, sometimes with unexpected consequences. This is why, for example, we support a revenue-neutral carbon tax combined with a rollback of other technology-specific mandates, taxes, and subsidies that would go a long way toward leveling the playing field. Ultimately, a balanced and responsive approach that acknowledges the real trade-offs between affordability, reliability, social impacts, environmental performance, and global objectives is the best strategy for reaching—and maintaining over time—any one of those energy goals. Our energy system has more jobs than one.
So while we find ourselves with breathing room today, we know that the path ahead is filled with uncertainty. The unforeseen developments that have delivered us to this point today could once again carry us to an unexpected situation tomorrow. Renewable resource costs have fallen faster than expected—can that pace be maintained as systems pass from plug-and-play at the margins to unexplored territory on the widespread integration or even centrality of intermittent generation? Natural gas has seen a boon throughout the country—how comfortable are we in betting the future on its continued low cost ubiquity? Coal has always been available alongside nuclear on the grid as a reliable base-load backstop—can we take for granted that it will survive a new regulatory environment through a series of technological miracles? Taking control of the grid through the large-scale storage of power would revolutionize our relationship with electricity and should be relentlessly pursued—but what if our technology can not deliver by the time we need it?
We are optimists about our country’s energy future. We are also realists. This book is about the nuclear situation today. But it is a mistake to compare the known challenges of the present with the pristine potential of the new. If one was to describe a new power-generating technology with almost no pollution, practically limitless fuel supplies, reliable operations, scalable, and statistically far safer than existing alternatives, it would understandably sound like a miracle. Our energy needs would be solved. No wonder the early America advocates of nuclear fission were so excited. Experienced reality is always more complicated, of course. We should bring to bear this country’s best minds and technologies to navigate that process responsibly. We have been through a roller coaster on energy in this country that is not likely to stop. New challenges will emerge, as will new opportunities.
It is far too early to take nuclear off the table.
View the discussion thread.
Join the Hoover Institution’s community of supporters in ideas advancing freedom.
Press centre
Nuclear technology and applications.
- Climate change
- Environment
- Food and agriculture
- Nuclear science
Nuclear safety and security
- Human and organizational factors
- Governmental, legal and regulatory framework
- Nuclear installation safety
- Radiation protection
- Security of nuclear and other radioactive material
- Radioactive waste and spent fuel management
- Emergency preparedness and response
Safeguards and verification
- Basics of IAEA Safeguards
- Safeguards implementation
- Safeguards legal framework
- Assistance for States
- Member States Support Programmes
Technical Cooperation Programme
- How it works
- How to participate
Coordinated research activities
- Legislative assistance
Key programmes
- Atoms4NetZero
- International Project on Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Cycles (INPRO)
- Together for More Women in Nuclear
- NUTEC Plastics
- Peaceful Uses Initiative
- Rays of Hope
- The SMR Platform and Nuclear Harmonization and Standardization Initiative (NHSI)
- Zoonotic Disease Integrated Action (ZODIAC)
Review missions and advisory services
- Catalogue of review missions and advisory services
- Peer review and advisory services calendar
Laboratory services
- Analytical reference materials
- Dosimetry calibration
- Dosimetry auditing
- Inter-laboratory comparisons
- Global Nuclear Safety and Security Network (GNSSN)
Education and training
- Training courses
- Online learning
Scientific and technical publications
- Full catalogue
- Safety Standards
- Nuclear Security Series
- Nuclear Energy Series
- Human Health Series
- Conference Proceedings
- Newsletters
- Nuclear Fusion Journal
General interest material
- IAEA Bulletin
- Nuclear Explained
- Photos (Flickr)
- Photo essays
- Briefs and factsheets
- IAEA Virtual Tours
Official documents
- Information circulars
NUCLEUS information resources
- International Nuclear Information System (INIS)
- Power Reactor Information System (PRIS)
- Advanced Reactors Information System (ARIS)
- Integrated Nuclear Fuel Cycle Information System (iNFCIS)
- Spent Fuel and Radioactive Waste Information System (SRIS)
- Nuclear Data Services (NDS)
- Research Reactor Database (RRDB)
Other resources
- Library – Nuclear Information Services
- Impact stories
- Press releases
- Media advisories
- Director General statements
- Photo library
- Press contacts
- Press enquiries
- General Conference
- Board of Governors
- Scientific and technical events
- Scientific Forum
- Medium-Term Strategy
- Partnerships
- Gender at the IAEA
- Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
- Multilingual content
- List of Member States
Management team
- Director General
- Deputy Directors General
Organizational structure
- Offices Reporting to the Director General
- Technical Cooperation
- Nuclear Energy
- Nuclear Safety and Security
- Nuclear Sciences and Applications
- Working at the IAEA
- Types of Employment
Procurement
- Procurement overview
Search form
You are here, what is nuclear energy the science of nuclear power.
If you would like to learn more about the IAEA’s work, sign up for our weekly updates containing our most important news, multimedia and more.
- Arabic (monthly)
- Chinese (monthly)
- English (weekly)
- French (monthly)
- Russian (monthly)
- Spanish (monthly)
Nuclear energy is a form of energy released from the nucleus, the core of atoms, made up of protons and neutrons. This source of energy can be produced in two ways: fission – when nuclei of atoms split into several parts – or fusion – when nuclei fuse together.
The nuclear energy harnessed around the world today to produce electricity is through nuclear fission, while technology to generate electricity from fusion is at the R&D phase. This article will explore nuclear fission. To learn more about nuclear fusion, click here .
What is nuclear fission?
Nuclear fission is a reaction where the nucleus of an atom splits into two or more smaller nuclei, while releasing energy.
For instance, when hit by a neutron, the nucleus of an atom of uranium-235 splits into two smaller nuclei, for example a barium nucleus and a krypton nucleus and two or three neutrons. These extra neutrons will hit other surrounding uranium-235 atoms, which will also split and generate additional neutrons in a multiplying effect, thus generating a chain reaction in a fraction of a second.
Each time the reaction occurs, there is a release of energy in the form of heat and radiation . The heat can be converted into electricity in a nuclear power plant, similarly to how heat from fossil fuels such as coal, gas and oil is used to generate electricity.
Nuclear fission (Graphic: A. Vargas/IAEA)
How does a nuclear power plant work?
Inside nuclear power plants, nuclear reactors and their equipment contain and control the chain reactions, most commonly fuelled by uranium-235, to produce heat through fission. The heat warms the reactor’s cooling agent, typically water, to produce steam. The steam is then channelled to spin turbines, activating an electric generator to create low-carbon electricity.
Find more details about the different types of nuclear power reactors on this page .
Pressurized water reactors are the most used in the world. (Graphic: A. Vargas/IAEA)
Mining, enrichment and disposal of uranium
Uranium is a metal that can be found in rocks all over the world. Uranium has several naturally occurring isotopes , which are forms of an element differing in mass and physical properties but with the same chemical properties. Uranium has two primordial isotopes: uranium-238 and uranium-235. Uranium-238 makes up the majority of the uranium in the world but cannot produce a fission chain reaction, while uranium-235 can be used to produce energy by fission but constitutes less than 1 per cent of the world’s uranium.
To make natural uranium more likely to undergo fission, it is necessary to increase the amount of uranium-235 in a given sample through a process called uranium enrichment. Once the uranium is enriched, it can be used effectively as nuclear fuel in power plants for three to five years, after which it is still radioactive and has to be disposed of following stringent guidelines to protect people and the environment. Used fuel, also referred to as spent fuel, can also be recycled into other types of fuel for use as new fuel in special nuclear power plants.
What is the Nuclear Fuel Cycle?
The nuclear fuel cycle is an industrial process involving various steps to produce electricity from uranium in nuclear power reactors. The cycle starts with the mining of uranium and ends with the disposal of nuclear waste.
Nuclear waste
The operation of nuclear power plants produces waste with varying levels of radioactivity. These are managed differently depending on their level of radioactivity and purpose. See the animation below to learn more about this topic.
Radioactive Waste Management
Radioactive waste makes up a small portion of all waste. It is the by-product of millions of medical procedures each year, industrial and agricultural applications that use radiation and nuclear reactors that generate around 11 % of global electricity. This animation explains how radioactive waste is managed to protect people and the environment from radiation now and in the future.
The next generation of nuclear power plants, also called innovative advanced reactors , will generate much less nuclear waste than today’s reactors. It is expected that they could be under construction by 2030.
Nuclear power and climate change
Nuclear power is a low-carbon source of energy, because unlike coal, oil or gas power plants, nuclear power plants practically do not produce CO 2 during their operation. Nuclear reactors generate close to one-third of the world’s carbon free electricity and are crucial in meeting climate change goals.
To find out more about nuclear power and the clean energy transition, read this edition of the IAEA Bulletin .
What is the role of the IAEA?
- The IAEA establishes and promotes international standards and guidance for the safe and secure use of nuclear energy to protect people and the environment.
- The IAEA supports existing and new nuclear programmes around the world by providing technical support and knowledge management. Through the Milestones Approach , the IAEA provides technical expertise and guidance to countries that want to develop a nuclear power programme as well as to those who are decommissioning theirs.
- Through its safeguards and verification activities, the IAEA oversees that nuclear material and technologies are not diverted from peaceful use.
- Review missions and advisory services led by the IAEA provide guidance on the activities necessary during the lifetime of production of nuclear energy: from the mining of uranium to the construction, maintenance and decommissioning of nuclear power plants and the management of nuclear waste.
- The IAEA administers a reserve of low enriched uranium (LEU ) in Kazakhstan, which can be used as a last resort by countries that are in urgent need of LEU for peaceful purposes.
This article was first published on iaea.org on 2 August 2021.
Related stories
Nuclear Power Proves its Vital Role as an Adaptable, Reliable Supplier of Electricity during COVID-19
IAEA and NEA-OECD Discuss Key Nuclear Power Developments During Annual Meeting
Clean Energy Ministerial Focuses on Nuclear Future
IAEA's Grossi Calls for Nuclear Power for Net Zero Emissions as Climate ‘Clock is Ticking’
UAE and Belarus Introduced Nuclear Power Last Year. Who is Next?
IAEA and IEA Agree to Boost Cooperation on Nuclear Power for Clean Energy Transition
Related resources
- Nuclear power reactors
- Energy, Electricity and Nuclear Power Estimates for the Period up to 2050
- IAEA Projections for Nuclear Power Through 2050
- Nuclear Power: The Road to a Carbon Free Future
- Nuclear explained
- Nuclear power and climate change: Decarbonization
- Department of Nuclear Energy
- Division of Nuclear Power
- Nuclear fuel cycle
- Uranium production
More on the IAEA
- Privacy Policy
- Logo Usage Guidelines
Scientific resources
- Information Circulars
- Standards and guides
- Safeguards and Additional Protocol
Stay in touch
Create an account
Create a free IEA account to download our reports or subcribe to a paid service.
Nuclear Power in a Clean Energy System
About this report.
With nuclear power facing an uncertain future in many countries, the world risks a steep decline in its use in advanced economies that could result in billions of tonnes of additional carbon emissions. Some countries have opted out of nuclear power in light of concerns about safety and other issues. Many others, however, still see a role for nuclear in their energy transitions but are not doing enough to meet their goals.
The publication of the IEA's first report addressing nuclear power in nearly two decades brings this important topic back into the global energy debate.
Key findings
Nuclear power is the second-largest source of low-carbon electricity today.
Nuclear power is the second-largest source of low-carbon electricity today, with 452 operating reactors providing 2700 TWh of electricity in 2018, or 10% of global electricity supply.
In advanced economies, nuclear has long been the largest source of low-carbon electricity, providing 18% of supply in 2018. Yet nuclear is quickly losing ground. While 11.2 GW of new nuclear capacity was connected to power grids globally in 2018 – the highest total since 1990 – these additions were concentrated in China and Russia.
Global low-carbon power generation by source, 2018
Cumulative co2 emissions avoided by global nuclear power in selected countries, 1971-2018, an aging nuclear fleet.
In the absense of further lifetime extensions and new projects could result in an additional 4 billion tonnes of CO2 emissions, underlining the importance of the nuclear fleet to low-carbon energy transitions around the globe. In emerging and developing economies, particularly China, the nuclear fleet will provide low-carbon electricity for decades to come.
However the nuclear fleet in advanced economies is 35 years old on average and many plants are nearing the end of their designed lifetimes. Given their age, plants are beginning to close, with 25% of existing nuclear capacity in advanced economies expected to be shut down by 2025.
It is considerably cheaper to extend the life of a reactor than build a new plant, and costs of extensions are competitive with other clean energy options, including new solar PV and wind projects. Nevertheless they still represent a substantial capital investment. The estimated cost of extending the operational life of 1 GW of nuclear capacity for at least 10 years ranges from $500 million to just over $1 billion depending on the condition of the site.
However difficult market conditions are a barrier to lifetime extension investments. An extended period of low wholesale electricity prices in most advanced economies has sharply reduced or eliminated margins for many technologies, putting nuclear at risk of shutting down early if additional investments are needed. As such, the feasibility of extensions depends largely on domestic market conditions.
Age profile of nuclear power capacity in selected regions, 2019
United states, levelised cost of electricity in the united states, 2040, european union, levelised cost of electricity in the european union, 2040, levelised cost of electricity in japan, 2040, the nuclear fade case, nuclear capacity operating in selected advanced economies in the nuclear fade case, 2018-2040, wind and solar pv generation by scenario 2019-2040, policy recommendations.
In this context, countries that intend to retain the option of nuclear power should consider the following actions:
- Keep the option open: Authorise lifetime extensions of existing nuclear plants for as long as safely possible.
- Value dispatchability: Design the electricity market in a way that properly values the system services needed to maintain electricity security, including capacity availability and frequency control services. Make sure that the providers of these services, including nuclear power plants, are compensated in a competitive and non-discriminatory manner.
- Value non-market benefits: Establish a level playing field for nuclear power with other low-carbon energy sources in recognition of its environmental and energy security benefits and remunerate it accordingly.
- Update safety regulations: Where necessary, update safety regulations in order to ensure the continued safe operation of nuclear plants. Where technically possible, this should include allowing flexible operation of nuclear power plants to supply ancillary services.
- Create a favourable financing framework: Create risk management and financing frameworks that facilitate the mobilisation of capital for new and existing plants at an acceptable cost taking the risk profile and long time-horizons of nuclear projects into consideration.
- Support new construction: Ensure that licensing processes do not lead to project delays and cost increases that are not justified by safety requirements.
- Support innovative new reactor designs: Accelerate innovation in new reactor designs with lower capital costs and shorter lead times and technologies that improve the operating flexibility of nuclear power plants to facilitate the integration of growing wind and solar capacity into the electricity system.
- Maintain human capital: Protect and develop the human capital and project management capabilities in nuclear engineering.
Executive summary
Nuclear power can play an important role in clean energy transitions.
Nuclear power today makes a significant contribution to electricity generation, providing 10% of global electricity supply in 2018. In advanced economies 1 , nuclear power accounts for 18% of generation and is the largest low-carbon source of electricity. However, its share of global electricity supply has been declining in recent years. That has been driven by advanced economies, where nuclear fleets are ageing, additions of new capacity have dwindled to a trickle, and some plants built in the 1970s and 1980s have been retired. This has slowed the transition towards a clean electricity system. Despite the impressive growth of solar and wind power, the overall share of clean energy sources in total electricity supply in 2018, at 36%, was the same as it was 20 years earlier because of the decline in nuclear. Halting that slide will be vital to stepping up the pace of the decarbonisation of electricity supply.
A range of technologies, including nuclear power, will be needed for clean energy transitions around the world. Global energy is increasingly based around electricity. That means the key to making energy systems clean is to turn the electricity sector from the largest producer of CO 2 emissions into a low-carbon source that reduces fossil fuel emissions in areas like transport, heating and industry. While renewables are expected to continue to lead, nuclear power can also play an important part along with fossil fuels using carbon capture, utilisation and storage. Countries envisaging a future role for nuclear account for the bulk of global energy demand and CO 2 emissions. But to achieve a trajectory consistent with sustainability targets – including international climate goals – the expansion of clean electricity would need to be three times faster than at present. It would require 85% of global electricity to come from clean sources by 2040, compared with just 36% today. Along with massive investments in efficiency and renewables, the trajectory would need an 80% increase in global nuclear power production by 2040.
Nuclear power plants contribute to electricity security in multiple ways. Nuclear plants help to keep power grids stable. To a certain extent, they can adjust their operations to follow demand and supply shifts. As the share of variable renewables like wind and solar photovoltaics (PV) rises, the need for such services will increase. Nuclear plants can help to limit the impacts from seasonal fluctuations in output from renewables and bolster energy security by reducing dependence on imported fuels.
Lifetime extensions of nuclear power plants are crucial to getting the energy transition back on track
Policy and regulatory decisions remain critical to the fate of ageing reactors in advanced economies. The average age of their nuclear fleets is 35 years. The European Union and the United States have the largest active nuclear fleets (over 100 gigawatts each), and they are also among the oldest: the average reactor is 35 years old in the European Union and 39 years old in the United States. The original design lifetime for operations was 40 years in most cases. Around one quarter of the current nuclear capacity in advanced economies is set to be shut down by 2025 – mainly because of policies to reduce nuclear’s role. The fate of the remaining capacity depends on decisions about lifetime extensions in the coming years. In the United States, for example, some 90 reactors have 60-year operating licenses, yet several have already been retired early and many more are at risk. In Europe, Japan and other advanced economies, extensions of plants’ lifetimes also face uncertain prospects.
Economic factors are also at play. Lifetime extensions are considerably cheaper than new construction and are generally cost-competitive with other electricity generation technologies, including new wind and solar projects. However, they still need significant investment to replace and refurbish key components that enable plants to continue operating safely. Low wholesale electricity and carbon prices, together with new regulations on the use of water for cooling reactors, are making some plants in the United States financially unviable. In addition, markets and regulatory systems often penalise nuclear power by not pricing in its value as a clean energy source and its contribution to electricity security. As a result, most nuclear power plants in advanced economies are at risk of closing prematurely.
The hurdles to investment in new nuclear projects in advanced economies are daunting
What happens with plans to build new nuclear plants will significantly affect the chances of achieving clean energy transitions. Preventing premature decommissioning and enabling longer extensions would reduce the need to ramp up renewables. But without new construction, nuclear power can only provide temporary support for the shift to cleaner energy systems. The biggest barrier to new nuclear construction is mobilising investment. Plans to build new nuclear plants face concerns about competitiveness with other power generation technologies and the very large size of nuclear projects that require billions of dollars in upfront investment. Those doubts are especially strong in countries that have introduced competitive wholesale markets.
A number of challenges specific to the nature of nuclear power technology may prevent investment from going ahead. The main obstacles relate to the sheer scale of investment and long lead times; the risk of construction problems, delays and cost overruns; and the possibility of future changes in policy or the electricity system itself. There have been long delays in completing advanced reactors that are still being built in Finland, France and the United States. They have turned out to cost far more than originally expected and dampened investor interest in new projects. For example, Korea has a much better record of completing construction of new projects on time and on budget, although the country plans to reduce its reliance on nuclear power.
Without nuclear investment, achieving a sustainable energy system will be much harder
A collapse in investment in existing and new nuclear plants in advanced economies would have implications for emissions, costs and energy security. In the case where no further investments are made in advanced economies to extend the operating lifetime of existing nuclear power plants or to develop new projects, nuclear power capacity in those countries would decline by around two-thirds by 2040. Under the current policy ambitions of governments, while renewable investment would continue to grow, gas and, to a lesser extent, coal would play significant roles in replacing nuclear. This would further increase the importance of gas for countries’ electricity security. Cumulative CO 2 emissions would rise by 4 billion tonnes by 2040, adding to the already considerable difficulties of reaching emissions targets. Investment needs would increase by almost USD 340 billion as new power generation capacity and supporting grid infrastructure is built to offset retiring nuclear plants.
Achieving the clean energy transition with less nuclear power is possible but would require an extraordinary effort. Policy makers and regulators would have to find ways to create the conditions to spur the necessary investment in other clean energy technologies. Advanced economies would face a sizeable shortfall of low-carbon electricity. Wind and solar PV would be the main sources called upon to replace nuclear, and their pace of growth would need to accelerate at an unprecedented rate. Over the past 20 years, wind and solar PV capacity has increased by about 580 GW in advanced economies. But in the next 20 years, nearly five times that much would need to be built to offset nuclear’s decline. For wind and solar PV to achieve that growth, various non-market barriers would need to be overcome such as public and social acceptance of the projects themselves and the associated expansion in network infrastructure. Nuclear power, meanwhile, can contribute to easing the technical difficulties of integrating renewables and lowering the cost of transforming the electricity system.
With nuclear power fading away, electricity systems become less flexible. Options to offset this include new gas-fired power plants, increased storage (such as pumped storage, batteries or chemical technologies like hydrogen) and demand-side actions (in which consumers are encouraged to shift or lower their consumption in real time in response to price signals). Increasing interconnection with neighbouring systems would also provide additional flexibility, but its effectiveness diminishes when all systems in a region have very high shares of wind and solar PV.
Offsetting less nuclear power with more renewables would cost more
Taking nuclear out of the equation results in higher electricity prices for consumers. A sharp decline in nuclear in advanced economies would mean a substantial increase in investment needs for other forms of power generation and the electricity network. Around USD 1.6 trillion in additional investment would be required in the electricity sector in advanced economies from 2018 to 2040. Despite recent declines in wind and solar costs, adding new renewable capacity requires considerably more capital investment than extending the lifetimes of existing nuclear reactors. The need to extend the transmission grid to connect new plants and upgrade existing lines to handle the extra power output also increases costs. The additional investment required in advanced economies would not be offset by savings in operational costs, as fuel costs for nuclear power are low, and operation and maintenance make up a minor portion of total electricity supply costs. Without widespread lifetime extensions or new projects, electricity supply costs would be close to USD 80 billion higher per year on average for advanced economies as a whole.
Strong policy support is needed to secure investment in existing and new nuclear plants
Countries that have kept the option of using nuclear power need to reform their policies to ensure competition on a level playing field. They also need to address barriers to investment in lifetime extensions and new capacity. The focus should be on designing electricity markets in a way that values the clean energy and energy security attributes of low-carbon technologies, including nuclear power.
Securing investment in new nuclear plants would require more intrusive policy intervention given the very high cost of projects and unfavourable recent experiences in some countries. Investment policies need to overcome financing barriers through a combination of long-term contracts, price guarantees and direct state investment.
Interest is rising in advanced nuclear technologies that suit private investment such as small modular reactors (SMRs). This technology is still at the development stage. There is a case for governments to promote it through funding for research and development, public-private partnerships for venture capital and early deployment grants. Standardisation of reactor designs would be crucial to benefit from economies of scale in the manufacturing of SMRs.
Continued activity in the operation and development of nuclear technology is required to maintain skills and expertise. The relatively slow pace of nuclear deployment in advanced economies in recent years means there is a risk of losing human capital and technical know-how. Maintaining human skills and industrial expertise should be a priority for countries that aim to continue relying on nuclear power.
The following recommendations are directed at countries that intend to retain the option of nuclear power. The IEA makes no recommendations to countries that have chosen not to use nuclear power in their clean energy transition and respects their choice to do so.
- Keep the option open: Authorise lifetime extensions of existing nuclear plants for as long as safely possible.
- Value non-market benefits: Establish a level playing field for nuclear power with other low carbon energy sources in recognition of its environmental and energy security benefits and remunerate it accordingly.
- Create an attractive financing framework: Set up risk management and financing frameworks that can help mobilise capital for new and existing plants at an acceptable cost, taking the risk profile and long time horizons of nuclear projects into consideration.
- Support new construction: Ensure that licensing processes do not lead to project delays and cost increases that are not justified by safety requirements. Support standardisation and enable learning-by-doing across the industry.
- Support innovative new reactor designs: Accelerate innovation in new reactor designs, such as small modular reactors (SMRs), with lower capital costs and shorter lead times and technologies that improve the operating flexibility of nuclear power plants to facilitate the integration of growing wind and solar capacity into the electricity system.
Advanced economies consist of Australia, Canada, Chile, the 28 members of the European Union, Iceland, Israel, Japan, Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, Turkey and the United States.
Reference 1
Cite report.
IEA (2019), Nuclear Power in a Clean Energy System , IEA, Paris https://www.iea.org/reports/nuclear-power-in-a-clean-energy-system, Licence: CC BY 4.0
Share this report
- Share on Twitter Twitter
- Share on Facebook Facebook
- Share on LinkedIn LinkedIn
- Share on Email Email
- Share on Print Print
Subscription successful
Thank you for subscribing. You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link at the bottom of any IEA newsletter.
- ENVIRONMENT
What is nuclear energy and is it a viable resource?
Nuclear energy's future as an electricity source may depend on scientists' ability to make it cheaper and safer.
Nuclear power is generated by splitting atoms to release the energy held at the core, or nucleus, of those atoms. This process, nuclear fission, generates heat that is directed to a cooling agent—usually water. The resulting steam spins a turbine connected to a generator, producing electricity.
About 450 nuclear reactors provide about 11 percent of the world's electricity. The countries generating the most nuclear power are, in order, the United States, France, China, Russia, and South Korea.
The most common fuel for nuclear power is uranium, an abundant metal found throughout the world. Mined uranium is processed into U-235, an enriched version used as fuel in nuclear reactors because its atoms can be split apart easily.
In a nuclear reactor, neutrons—subatomic particles that have no electric charge—collide with atoms, causing them to split. That collision—called nuclear fission—releases more neutrons that react with more atoms, creating a chain reaction. A byproduct of nuclear reactions, plutonium , can also be used as nuclear fuel.
Types of nuclear reactors
In the U.S. most nuclear reactors are either boiling water reactors , in which the water is heated to the boiling point to release steam, or pressurized water reactors , in which the pressurized water does not boil but funnels heat to a secondary water supply for steam generation. Other types of nuclear power reactors include gas-cooled reactors, which use carbon dioxide as the cooling agent and are used in the U.K., and fast neutron reactors, which are cooled by liquid sodium.
Nuclear energy history
The idea of nuclear power began in the 1930s , when physicist Enrico Fermi first showed that neutrons could split atoms. Fermi led a team that in 1942 achieved the first nuclear chain reaction, under a stadium at the University of Chicago. This was followed by a series of milestones in the 1950s: the first electricity produced from atomic energy at Idaho's Experimental Breeder Reactor I in 1951; the first nuclear power plant in the city of Obninsk in the former Soviet Union in 1954; and the first commercial nuclear power plant in Shippingport, Pennsylvania, in 1957. ( Take our quizzes about nuclear power and see how much you've learned: for Part I, go here ; for Part II, go here .)
Nuclear power, climate change, and future designs
Nuclear power isn't considered renewable energy , given its dependence on a mined, finite resource, but because operating reactors do not emit any of the greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming , proponents say it should be considered a climate change solution . National Geographic emerging explorer Leslie Dewan, for example, wants to resurrect the molten salt reactor , which uses liquid uranium dissolved in molten salt as fuel, arguing it could be safer and less costly than reactors in use today.
Others are working on small modular reactors that could be portable and easier to build. Innovations like those are aimed at saving an industry in crisis as current nuclear plants continue to age and new ones fail to compete on price with natural gas and renewable sources such as wind and solar.
The holy grail for the future of nuclear power involves nuclear fusion, which generates energy when two light nuclei smash together to form a single, heavier nucleus. Fusion could deliver more energy more safely and with far less harmful radioactive waste than fission, but just a small number of people— including a 14-year-old from Arkansas —have managed to build working nuclear fusion reactors. Organizations such as ITER in France and Max Planck Institute of Plasma Physics are working on commercially viable versions, which so far remain elusive.
Nuclear power risks
When arguing against nuclear power, opponents point to the problems of long-lived nuclear waste and the specter of rare but devastating nuclear accidents such as those at Chernobyl in 1986 and Fukushima Daiichi in 2011 . The deadly Chernobyl disaster in Ukraine happened when flawed reactor design and human error caused a power surge and explosion at one of the reactors. Large amounts of radioactivity were released into the air, and hundreds of thousands of people were forced from their homes . Today, the area surrounding the plant—known as the Exclusion Zone—is open to tourists but inhabited only by the various wildlife species, such as gray wolves , that have since taken over .
In the case of Japan's Fukushima Daiichi, the aftermath of the Tohoku earthquake and tsunami caused the plant's catastrophic failures. Several years on, the surrounding towns struggle to recover, evacuees remain afraid to return , and public mistrust has dogged the recovery effort, despite government assurances that most areas are safe.
Other accidents, such as the partial meltdown at Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island in 1979, linger as terrifying examples of nuclear power's radioactive risks. The Fukushima disaster in particular raised questions about safety of power plants in seismic zones, such as Armenia's Metsamor power station.
Other issues related to nuclear power include where and how to store the spent fuel, or nuclear waste, which remains dangerously radioactive for thousands of years. Nuclear power plants, many of which are located on or near coasts because of the proximity to water for cooling, also face rising sea levels and the risk of more extreme storms due to climate change.
Related Topics
- NUCLEAR ENERGY
- NUCLEAR WEAPONS
- TOXIC WASTE
- RENEWABLE ENERGY
You May Also Like
This pill could protect us from radiation after a nuclear meltdown
Scientists achieve a breakthrough in nuclear fusion. Here’s what it means.
This young nuclear engineer has a new plan for clean energy
The true history of Einstein's role in developing the atomic bomb
Who is Oppenheimer? The controversial man behind the atomic bomb
- Environment
- Paid Content
History & Culture
- History & Culture
- Terms of Use
- Privacy Policy
- Your US State Privacy Rights
- Children's Online Privacy Policy
- Interest-Based Ads
- About Nielsen Measurement
- Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
- Nat Geo Home
- Attend a Live Event
- Book a Trip
- Inspire Your Kids
- Shop Nat Geo
- Visit the D.C. Museum
- Learn About Our Impact
- Support Our Mission
- Advertise With Us
- Customer Service
- Renew Subscription
- Manage Your Subscription
- Work at Nat Geo
- Sign Up for Our Newsletters
- Contribute to Protect the Planet
Copyright © 1996-2015 National Geographic Society Copyright © 2015-2024 National Geographic Partners, LLC. All rights reserved
Subscribe to the PwC Newsletter
Join the community, edit social preview.
Add a new code entry for this paper
Remove a code repository from this paper, mark the official implementation from paper authors, add a new evaluation result row.
| TASK | DATASET | MODEL | METRIC NAME | METRIC VALUE | GLOBAL RANK | REMOVE |
|---|
Remove a task
Add a method, remove a method, edit datasets, imaging the structure of atomic nuclei in high-energy nuclear collisions from star experiment.
15 Sep 2024 · Chunjian Zhang · Edit social preview
In relativistic heavy-ion collisions, the extractions of properties of quark-gluon plasma (QGP) are hindered by a limited understanding of its initial conditions, where the nuclear structure of the colliding ions play a significant role. In these proceedings, we present the first quantitative demonstration using ``collective flow assisted nuclear shape imaging" method to extract the quadrupole deformation and triaxiality from $^{238}$U using data from the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC). We achieve this by comparing bulk observables in $^{238}$U+$^{238}$U collisions with nearly spherical $^{197}$Au+$^{197}$Au collisions. A similar comparative measurement performed in collisions of $^{96}$Ru+$^{96}$Ru and $^{96}$Zr+$^{96}$Zr, suggests the presence of moderate quadrupole deformation of $^{96}$Ru, large octupole deformation of $^{96}$Zr, as well as an apparent neutron skin difference between these two species. The prospect of this nuclear shape imaging method as a novel tool for the study of nuclear structure is also elaborated.
Code Edit Add Remove Mark official
COMMENTS
Clean Energy Source. Nuclear is the largest source of clean power in the United States. It generates nearly 775 billion kilowatthours of electricity each year and produces nearly half of the nation's emissions-free electricity. This avoids more than 471 million metric tons of carbon each year, which is the equivalent of removing 100 million cars off of the road.
A rather important advantage of nuclear energy is that it is much safer than fossil fuels from a public health perspective. The pro-nuclear movement leverages the fact that nuclear waste is not even remotely as dangerous as the toxic chemicals coming from fossil fuels. Indeed, coal and oil act as 'invisible killers' and are responsible for ...
Ans. Nuclear energy is the energy released during nuclear reactions. Its importance lies in generating electricity, medical applications, and powering spacecraft. 2. Write a short note on nuclear energy. Ans. Nuclear energy is exploited from the nucleus of atoms through processes like fission or fusion.
Nuclear power is the energy generated by use of Uranium. The energy is produced via complex chemical processes in the nuclear power stations. Major chemical reactions that involve the splitting of atom's nucleus take place in the reactors. This process is known as fission (Klug and Davies 31-32). The first nuclear power station was ...
Manageable Costs. Development costs of nuclear energy remain comparable to those of wind or solar power, while operational expenses are notably lower than fossil fuel alternatives. Front-end costs are significantly lower compared to natural gas and coal, making it economically feasible for most developed countries. 8.
Lastly, nuclear energy is a reliable renewable energy source based on its constant production and accessibility. Nuclear power plants produce their maximum power output more often (93% of the time) than any other energy source, and because of this round-the-clock stability, makes nuclear energy an ideal source of reliable baseload electricity ...
The top five advantages of nuclear energy: It's a low-carbon energy source. It has a small carbon footprint compared to alternatives like fossil fuels. It's key to combating climate change and reaching net zero. It's safe and reliable - providing us with power whatever the weather. Countries that use nuclear and renewable energy ...
Nuclear power pros. Nuclear power has quite a number of pros associated with its use. The first pro of nuclear energy is that it emits little pollution to the environment. A power plant that uses coal emits more radiation than nuclear powered plant. Another pro of nuclear energy is that it is reliable. Because of the fact that nuclear plants ...
The purpose of this paper is to inform readers about the advantages and disadvantages of using nuclear power to create electrical energy. Advantages of Nuclear Power. Most light water reactors (See Fig. 1) that make up the world's nuclear capacity create electricity at costs of between $0.025 and $0.07 USD per kilowatt-hour dependent upon the ...
One of the biggest advantages of nuclear energy is that it doesn't produce any greenhouse gases. Instead, nuclear power plants release clouds full of harmless water vapor, which is infinitely better for both humans and the environment. Currently, fossil fuel combustion accounts for 74% of total GHG emissions and 92% of anthropogenic carbon ...
This essay will argue that nuclear energy is the most effective way of generating electricity. One of the factors why nuclear energy is an effective source of energy is that it is cost effective. Electricity generated from nuclear energy is economical and saves cost when compared with other forms of electricity from renewable sources like sun ...
2. Nuclear energy does not pollute the air. Nuclear energy can provide round-the-clock electricity generation without polluting the air. Currently, about two-thirds of the world's electricity is produced by burning fossil fuels. Burning fossil fuels releases greenhouse gases into the air.
Nuclear energy in Spain. Nuclear energy in Spain dates back to 1969, with the inauguration in Guadalajara of the José Cabrera power plant, better known as Zorita. This plant was in operation until 2006. At the moment, we have seven operational reactors distributed throughout the country, all of them commissioned during the eighties.
607 Words | 3 Pages. Nuclear power produces fewer carbon emissions than traditional energy sources because energy is not produced by burning molecules but splitting atoms. 'An energy mix including nuclear power has the lowest impact on wildlife and Ecosystems' as shown by a Conservation Biology paper.
For decades, there has been a huge debate about whether to utilize nuclear energy. Despite its controversy, the U.S. Energy Information Association estimates that nuclear energy still makes up almost 20% of all the energy generation in the country.. Nuclear energy has several advantages - it gives off zero carbon emissions, creates a huge job market, is a low-cost source, and more!
In the early 1950s, when the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission believed high-grade uranium ores to be in short supply domestically, it considered extracting uranium for nuclear weapons from the abundant U.S. supply of fly ash from coal burning. In 2007, China began exploring such extraction, drawing on a pile of some 5.3 million metric tons of brown-coal fly ash at Xiaolongtang in Yunnan.
For example, the assumed height of Tsunami waves against Fukushima nuclear power plant #1 was 10 meters while over 14 meters Tsunami waves hit the power plant on March 11, 2011. About nuclear energy, we still have two unsolved problems from the technology and engineering viewpoint: nuclear decommissioning and how to manage nuclear wastes.
The following essay is excerpted from the foreword to Keeping the Lights on at America's Nuclear Power Plants, a new book from the Hoover Institution's Shultz-Stephenson Task Force on Energy Policy.This work is part of the task force's Reinventing Nuclear Power research series.. Nuclear power alone will not solve our energy problems.
The Science of Nuclear Power. Nuclear energy is a form of energy released from the nucleus, the core of atoms, made up of protons and neutrons. This source of energy can be produced in two ways: fission - when nuclei of atoms split into several parts - or fusion - when nuclei fuse together. The nuclear energy harnessed around the world ...
Nuclear power is the second-largest source of low-carbon electricity today, with 452 operating reactors providing 2700 TWh of electricity in 2018, or 10% of global electricity supply. In advanced economies, nuclear has long been the largest source of low-carbon electricity, providing 18% of supply in 2018. Yet nuclear is quickly losing ground.
Nuclear energy from fission of uranium and plutonium is sustainable because it meets all of the above-mentioned criteria: Today's commercial uranium-fueled nuclear power plants can provide the world with clean, economical and reliable energy well into the next century on the basis of the already-identified uranium deposits (Table 1).Furthermore, as was pointed out by Enrico Fermi already in ...
Like other advanced techno- logies, nuclear energy contributes to social and economic progress and in particular to increase in human capital assets. However, some aspects of its use, e.g., highly radioactive waste accumulation and risks of weapon proliferation, raise civil society concerns.
Nuclear energy's future as an electricity source may depend on scientists' ability to make it cheaper and safer. Nuclear power is generated by splitting atoms to release the energy held at the ...
Imaging the structure of atomic nuclei in high-energy nuclear collisions from STAR experiment 15 Sep 2024 · Chunjian Zhang · Edit social preview. In relativistic heavy-ion collisions, the extractions of properties of quark-gluon plasma (QGP) are hindered by a limited understanding of its initial conditions, where the nuclear structure of the ...