Nuclear Power in the Energy Transition: A Phoenix Reborn?

This past month, world leaders met in Glasgow for the UN’s 26th annual Climate Change Conference (COP26). The devastating effects of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were at the centre of discussions, as leaders deliberated the mass adoption of clean energy to achieve net-zero goals. Unfortunately, energy transition has proven costly and tedious given current overdependence on fossil fuels and the difficulty of scaling-up renewables. Countries like France and China have recently doubled down on nuclear energy, which is considered to be one of the safest, cleanest and cheapest sources of power today. Others, such as Germany and Belgium, are phasing out the technology. Despite its controversial reputation, nuclear power could be energy’s dark horse, paving the way for renewables while minimizing the risks of energy transition. 

Nuclear energy stems from the process of fission, or the splitting of uranium atoms, which generates heat. This heat releases steam, spinning a turbine that transforms the energy into electricity. This process is comparably resource efficient; the fission of a single gram of uranium generates as much energy as the combustion of three tons of coal or 600 gallons of fuel. The number of nuclear reactors grew exponentially after the 1950s, stalled following Chernobyl, and has been steadily declining since Fukushima. However, dependence on nuclear energy varies among states: 70% of France’s total energy is nuclear-generated, compared to 20% for the United States and 11% for Germany. 

Today, nuclear energy is subject to an array of misconceptions that undermine its advantages. For example, it is often argued that nuclear power is too costly compared to other sources of energy.

While nuclear power plants are certainly expensive to build, their operation is relatively economical, which balances out the overall costs. When accounting for differences in interest rates, nuclear power is also an affordable option. In fact, the Nuclear Energy Association estimates that the levelised cost of nuclear is 68 USD/MWh, slightly more expensive than solar (54) but much cheaper than gas (92) and coal (114). A further misconception lies in the cleanliness of nuclear energy. Contrary to popular belief, nuclear power is one of the cleanest sources of energy, as nuclear power plants do not emit any GHGs. Even considering emissions generated by the construction of plants, nuclear power is on par with wind and in front of all other sources of energy. 

While nuclear power plants do produce highly-radioactive waste, or ‘nuclear fuel’, this waste is safely stored in designated disposal sites. Ronald Reagan once famously assured Americans that "all the waste in a year from a nuclear power plant can be stored under a desk.” In fact, all of the fuel produced in the U.S. since the 1950s fits in an area the size of a football field with a height of ten yards. Even though this waste is small, it remains radioactive for millennia and could prove problematic if accumulated in the long run. However, recycling uranium in closed-fuel cycles and improving storage efficiency are potential solutions. 

Another major challenge for nuclear energy is the financing of power plants. Indeed, the structure of nuclear financing greatly varies by region. For instance, the U.S. interest rate for nuclear construction is six times higher than Japan’s, causing major discrepancies in the viability of this source of energy. As a result, nuclear power is more expensive than gas and coal in the U.S., while in Japan, it is one of the cheapest sources of energy. Modern private investors also lack the long-term vision required for nuclear, preferring high short-term returns. The structure of nuclear financing poses a dilemma: on the one hand, nuclear power plants could be financed by private investment, which certainly has more funds available and allows the market to function “freely.” On the other hand, the financing could be done by governments that do not necessarily seek profit, which would lower the cost of energy. If private investors do not revise their high short-term return mindset, government funding will always seem the most viable option for nuclear financing.

Bill Gates defends that "nuclear energy, in terms of an overall safety record, is better than other energy." When considering the infamous disasters of Chernobyl and Fukushima, this affirmation may shock many. However, nuclear energy is much safer today than ever before. While approximately 50 individuals have died due to radiation exposure from the soviet disaster, there have been no casualties following Fukushima. This demonstrates major advances in the safety of power plants, reactor design and crisis management. Overall, nuclear power has actually caused the least deaths by energy source per TWh of electricity produced. The perceived threat of nuclear power is clearly greater than the threat itself, especially when compared to the damage caused by other sources of energy. The burning of fossil fuels alone kills nine million people per year, an astronomical number that will likely increase in the future. 

Nuclear safety will also be improved by the adoption of Generation IV reactors. A state-of-the-art technology, Generation IV reactors resolve many of nuclear energy's current limits. As well as being safer than predecessors thanks to improved operating features, these new reactors are smaller and easier to build, opening the door to short-term private investment. Furthermore, they are more sustainable; Generation IV reactors function in closed fuel cycles that reprocess most of the used uranium into new fuel, addressing concerns about uranium scarcity. As a result, the radioactive lifespan of nuclear waste produced by fourth-generation reactors will decrease tenfold. 

The decision for some countries to phase out nuclear energy may prove to be a significant mistake. Recent months have revealed only a fragment of the energy crisis to come - nuclear energy can firmly mitigate the unavoidable risks we will face in the future. In the words of French energy and climate expert Jean-Marc Jancovici, nuclear power is clearly the “most efficient way to soften the fall when fossil fuels eventually vanish.” Today, this source of energy is one of the safest, cleanest and cheapest that exists, and significant technological developments in previous decades show promise for the upcoming ones.