The Future of Nuclear Power
The Fukushima Prefecture in Northeastern Japan has been little known to foreigners until the disastrous accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in March this year. Watching the terrible consequences of the release of radiation in a densely populated industrialized country has alerted many people around the world. While the danger of nuclear accidents has barely been acknowledged by the masses in recent years due to the sense of security and economic benefits resulting from a long accident-free period, the prospects for new nuclear power projects across the world has become dire.
Did Fukushima bring the period of increased acceptance of nuclear power as a clean and cheap energy source in the face of climate change and energy scarcity to a sudden end?
Possibly. However, there is a chance the incident in Japan might set off a new wave of construction of nuclear power plants. How?
As obvious to anyone who seriously dealt with the issue, the public has been made aware of the increased risk stemming from old nuclear plants. And without a doubt, pressure to shut down these old plants instead of prolonging their operating cycles - as has become a common practice in many countries - has increased. Still, it is important to consider why many nuclear power plants stay online longer than they were intended to at their time of construction.
Opposition to nuclear power plants has been strong ever since the Chernobyl disaster in 1986. This made it more difficult for governments and power companies to get permission to build further nuclear plants without having to fight costly court battles for decades. Germany even moved as far as to gradually phase out nuclear power plants completely. A result of this development was the drop in planning for new reactors and the increased efforts to extend the operating cycles of existing ones, as having an old reactor run longer was less problematic for the public and politicians than building a new one.
Consequently, increased public opposition to nuclear power increased the risk by prolonging the lives of old reactors while avoiding or at least postponing their replacement with newer reactors with more advanced technology and increased safety. This is a perfect example of how uninformed public opinion is being addressed by populist politicians and corporations with negative implications for the overall well-being of the economy and environment.
Until March 11, 2011, this seemed to work out for everyone. The public did not have to fight too many new nuclear power projects, politicians could rely on the benefits of a zero emissions energy source and energy companies were making a profit off long written-off old reactors producing cheap electricity and selling it for higher market prices.
Some nuclear power opponents now hope that the accident will lead to a quick phasing out of existing plants and no plans for new reactors. In my opinion, this is unlikely to happen for a number of reasons.
Firstly, in a world with a growing global population, rising energy demand and high energy prices, it is unlikely that a lower share of nuclear power will find a lot of support in the long run. Consumers tend to favor the cheapest form of energy available, and as fossil fuel prices will increase due to scarcity and rising demand, nuclear power will seem the even more attractive alternative.
Secondly, as the world is watching carbon emissions closely due to their role in climate change, there can hardly be an energy policy that completely shuns a cheap, zero carbon dioxide emissions power source. The necessity of reducing carbon emissions at an affordable price will make nuclear one of the few feasible options.
In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised to see an increase in the construction of new nuclear power plants in the medium term. Given that Tokyo Electric Power Corp. manages to achieve a cold shut down without drawing much more negative attention and the tangible consequences of the accident turn out to be more moderate than feared, there is an opportunity for politicians and energy companies to win the public’s approval for the construction of new, safer power plants by offering a quicker phase out of old reactors.
According to the New York Times, the public opinion of nuclear power in Japan is surprisingly good with more than half of the population willing to “retain” the existing level of nuclear power in the country.
If the public in Western countries can be convinced that new nuclear power plants replacing old reactors will actually reduce the risk of future radiation releases, a new era of nuclear power could begin.
