The world’s 438 nuclear reactors produce about 11 percent of its electricity. Sixty seven more are under construction. In the U.K., where almost a fifth of the electricity comes from nuclear power, the government has ambitious expansion plans, including construction of the world’s most expensive atomic station in a joint venture with China. Germany is headed in the opposite direction: Chancellor Angela Merkel wants to close all of its nuclear plants by 2022. China, choked by air pollution, plans to expand nuclear operations and construction fourfold by 2020; India aims to supply 25 percent of its electricity from nuclear power by 2050. In late 2014, the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station was shut down, the fourth U.S. nuclear facility to close in two years. Yet six new reactors may come on line in the U.S. by 2020, according to the World Nuclear Association. New federal requirements for cutting carbon emissions may provide an additional push. Japan went nuclear-free in September 2013 — temporarily, and not entirely by choice. Within a year of the Fukushima disaster, all but two of Japan’s 43 commercial nuclear reactors had been shut down either because of damage from the 2011 earthquake and tsunami, or for maintenance or safety checks. The two remaining plants went offline in September 2013. While Japanese leaders pledged to promote renewable energy sources, its policy statements call nuclear power an important source of reliable energy for a nation that relies on imported fuels for 96 percent of its electricity-generating needs.
Nuclear pioneers after World War II envisioned an abundance of clean energy at low cost. Before reactor accidents released radiation at Three Mile Island in the U.S. in 1979 and Chernobyl in the Soviet Union seven years later, the benefits seemed to outweigh the dangers. In recent years, nuclear power, which produces no greenhouse-gas emissions, seemed poised for a renaissance based on worries about climate change. The economic and environmental risk-reward ratios are moving targets. Horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing are squeezing torrents of oil and gas from shale rock, pushing down prices. That reduces nuclear power’s economic value but not its appeal to opponents of the new oil-production techniques. Renewables are a small though growing part of the energy picture. Germany’s government plans to get 80 percent of its electricity from sources like solar and wind by 2050, up from about 26 percent now. Still, as of 2012, biofuels and waste accounted for 10 percent of the world’s energy supply, hydroelectricity for 2.4 percent and other renewables for about 1.1 percent.
Proponents of nuclear energy say accidents like the Fukushima meltdown are rare, that reactors are getting safer, and that fossil fuels are responsible for more deaths, through mine accidents and pollution. Opponents say Fukushima shows that reactors can’t be made to withstand catastrophes. They also cite the cost and environmental risks involved in disposing of nuclear waste. Better, they say, to develop cleaner sources of energy such as solar and wind power. The question is whether renewables will be enough to head off extreme global warming or whether nuclear energy is no longer an option — but a necessity.
The Reference Shelf
- Nuclear power primer by How Stuff Works.
- The International Energy Agency’s Key World Energy Statistics report for 2014.
- The U.S. government’s 2014 International Energy Outlook.
- Global statistics from the Nuclear Energy Institute, a U.S. industry lobbying group.
- Bloomberg Businessweek article on Germany’s planned nuclear phaseout.
- Information library of the World Nuclear Association, a global industry trade group.
To receive a free monthly QuickTake newsletter, sign up at www.bloombergbriefs.com/quicktake