The Role of Nuclear Energy in Sustainable Development
In the midst of the world’s present climate catastrophe, there is a strong discussion on clean and renewable energy sources to assist sustainable growth. Wind, solar, and hydroelectric energy are popular possibilities, but nuclear energy and power generating should also be considered. However, many environmentalists are concerned about the possible consequences of nuclear mishaps, asking the question, “Is nuclear energy clean?” Nuclear power, like wind, solar, and hydro, is a clean source of energy with zero carbon emissions when compared to its naturally occurring equivalents. Nuclear fission processes produce energy by splitting uranium atoms, which produces a massive amount of steam, which spins turbines. This procedure produces no harmful emissions, and the United States was able to avoid 476 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2019, the equivalent of eliminating 100 million automobiles from the road. Nuclear power generation outperforms traditional renewables due to its reduced land and carbon impact. A typical 1000-megawatt plant takes up only one square kilometer of area. Wind farms require at least 360 times the space of solar farms, and solar farms require at least 75 times the space of wind farms. Nuclear power has supplied a sixth of the energy in the United States since 1990, accounting for 92.5% of capacity factors.
According to a recent research, nuclear power has consistently reduced emissions from production-based sources across numerous nations in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Long-term market predictions show that nuclear power has significant market potential due to its cost effectiveness, energy security, and economic growth. Wind and solar, on the other hand, are intermittent by nature, and their potential to create power may not always match demand. Other power sources must occasionally be used in power systems that rely on renewables to enhance or decrease supply on short notice. Nuclear power, on the other hand, is significantly more constant and reliable. However, there are several significant flaws.
The Three Mile Island Accident, the Chernobyl Disaster, and the Fukushima Daiichi Disaster are three major footnotes in the history of nuclear power generation.
Near summary, the Three Mile Island Accident occurred on March 28, 1979, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, USA. A pressurized water reactor had a coolant leak, resulting in nuclear fuel damage. The Chernobyl disaster happened on April 26, 1989, in the Ukrainian city of Pripyat. Human mistake during a regular test process resulted in a devastating explosion in the power plant’s reactor four. Finally, on March 11, 2011, a major earthquake and tsunami devastated the northeast of Japan, inflicting catastrophic damage to the whole plant.
According to a research that offered a detailed assessment of all three occurrences, the mishaps resulted in the spread of hazardous radioactive material to varied degrees in each case. The Chernobyl disaster is still considered the worst catastrophe of its sort in history, followed by Fukushima. These incidents have far-reaching and long-lasting consequences for the nuclear sector, altering regulatory standards, crisis management tactics, and communication transparency.
Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima each had their own set of constraints, but they all had one thing in common: the authorities in charge of dealing with the accidents were poor at conveying the entire magnitude of the harm to the public. This resulted in hurried cleanup attempts, huge evacuations, and environmental damage that would be difficult to reconcile in a court of public opinion. Since then, these occurrences have cast an unfavorable light on the nuclear sector. Regardless of economic or environmental gains, the damage has been done, and nuclear power is being assessed on its failures rather than its triumphs.
Nonetheless, the topic of nuclear power is very contentious across the world. New power plants are being built in nations such as Belarus, Turkey, and Bangladesh. Other countries, on the other hand, are reducing their reliance on nuclear energy. Germany remains dedicated to its plans to phase out nuclear power, but the crisis in Ukraine and the desire for Europe to wean itself from Russian oil and gas have created some delays in implementation.
The inherent hazards associated with nuclear power cannot be disregarded in the discussion on sustainable development in the face of the climate crisis. Nonetheless, all solutions must be left on the table and given fair consideration. Despite these substantial obstacles, as policy experts and scientists have demonstrated, nuclear power can be clean and remains a viable energy choice with a consistent track record.
By Yimeng CHEN
