The Potential Resurgence of Nuclear Power

Ten years prior, the worldwide nuclear sector appeared to be experiencing an irreversible downturn. Apprehensions regarding safety, expenses, and the management of radioactive waste had diminished interest in a technology previously regarded as a groundbreaking provider of plentiful, inexpensive energy. However, discussions of a resurgence are now prevalent, driven by major technology companies Microsoft, Google, and Amazon, which have all declared investments in this field, alongside increasing demands on affluent countries to reduce their carbon emissions. The extent of this recovery, however, remains to be seen. In the 1950s and 1960s, when commercial nuclear power initially emerged, governments were drawn to its apparently boundless capabilities. Nuclear reactors possessed the ability to capture and manage the immense power equivalent to that unleashed by atomic bombs, generating electricity for millions of residences. Given that one kilogram of uranium could produce approximately 20,000 times the energy of a kilogram of coal, it appeared to represent the energy solution of the future. Nevertheless, this technology also generated public apprehension. This apprehension appeared validated by the Chernobyl disaster in early 1986, which disseminated radioactive contamination throughout Europe. This event sparked extensive public and political resistance, impeding the industry’s expansion. A subsequent incident at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi plant in 2011 reignited worries regarding nuclear safety. Japan subsequently deactivated all its reactors, with only 12 having resumed operation since. Germany opted to completely discontinue nuclear power. Other nations reduced their intentions to invest in new power stations or prolong the operational lifespan of existing ones. The International Atomic Energy Agency reported that this resulted in a worldwide reduction of 48GW in electric power generation from 2011 to 2020. Nevertheless, nuclear development continued. For instance, China had 13 nuclear reactors in 2011, a number that has grown to 55, with an additional 23 currently being built. For the Chinese capital, striving to satisfy escalating electricity requirements, nuclear energy has maintained, and continues to hold, a crucial function. Interest in this industry appears to be resurfacing in other regions. This renewed attention is partly attributable to developed nations seeking methods to fulfill energy needs while simultaneously endeavoring to achieve emissions reduction goals outlined in the Paris Agreement. As 2024 is anticipated to be the warmest year ever recorded, the imperative to decrease carbon emissions is intensifying. Heightened emphasis on energy security, following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, has also contributed to this trend. For instance, South Korea recently abandoned its strategy to decommission its substantial nuclear power plant fleet over the coming four decades, opting instead to construct additional facilities. Similarly, France has rescinded its intentions to lessen its dependence on nuclear energy, which supplies 70% of its electricity, and now aims to construct up to eight new reactors. Furthermore, the US government reiterated last week at the United Nations Climate Change Conference, Cop29, held in Azerbaijan, its goal to triple nuclear power generation by 2050. This commitment was initially made by the White House during last year’s Cop28 conference. Currently, 31 nations, including the UK, France, and Japan, have committed to endeavoring to triple their nuclear power usage by 2050. At Cop29, concluding on Friday, 22 November, the US and UK declared their intention to collaborate on accelerating the advancement of new nuclear power technology. This announcement followed an agreement in the concluding statement, or “stocktake,” of last year’s Cop28, which identified nuclear power as one of the zero or low emission technologies to be “accelerated” in the fight against climate change. However, the demand for clean energy extends beyond governmental initiatives. Major technology companies are actively pursuing the creation of an increasing number of artificial intelligence applications. Nevertheless, AI depends on data, and data centers require uninterrupted, dependable electricity. Barclays Research indicates that data centers currently consume 3.5% of electricity in the US, a proportion that could exceed 9% by the close of the decade. In September, Microsoft entered into a 20-year agreement to procure power from Constellation Energy, a move that will result in the reactivation of the well-known Three Mile Island power station in Pennsylvania, the location of the most severe nuclear accident in US history, involving a partial reactor meltdown in 1979. Despite its compromised public perception, a different reactor at the facility remained operational, producing electricity until 2019. Constellation’s chief executive, Joe Dominguez, characterized the agreement for its reopening as a “powerful symbol of the rebirth of nuclear power as a clean and reliable energy resource”. Other prominent technology firms have adopted an alternative strategy. Google intends to purchase energy generated by several Small Modular Reactors, or SMRs, which represent an emerging technology designed to facilitate easier and more cost-effective deployment of nuclear energy. Amazon is additionally providing backing for the development and construction of SMRs. SMRs are being advocated, in part, as a remedy for a significant challenge currently confronting nuclear power. In Western countries, the construction of new power stations must adhere to stringent contemporary safety regulations. This requirement, coupled with their substantial size, renders them excessively costly and complex to construct. Hinkley Point C serves as a pertinent illustration. This facility, the UK’s inaugural new nuclear power station since the mid-1990s, is under construction along a secluded coastal area in southwest England. It is intended to be the initial installation in a series of new plants designed to supersede the nation’s aging reactor infrastructure. However, the undertaking is currently approximately five years behind its projected timeline and is anticipated to incur costs up to £9bn ($11.5bn) beyond its original budget. This situation is not unique. The most recent reactors in the US, located at Plant Vogtle in Georgia, commenced operations seven years behind schedule and exceeded their initial budget by more than double, costing over $35bn. SMRs are engineered to address this issue. These reactors will be more compact than conventional designs, employing standardized components that allow for rapid assembly at locations near electricity demand. Despite approximately 80 distinct designs being developed worldwide, as reported by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the commercial viability of this concept remains unconfirmed. Perspectives on nuclear power continue to be sharply divided. Proponents assert that this technology is essential for achieving climate objectives. Rod Adams, whose Nucleation Capital fund advocates for investment in nuclear technology, is among them. He states, “Nuclear fission has a seven-decade history showing it is one of the safest power sources available,” adding, “It is a durable, reliable source of power with low ongoing costs already, but capital costs have been too high in Western countries.” Conversely, critics maintain that nuclear power is not the solution. Professor M.V. Ramana of the University of British Columbia contends that it is “a folly to consider nuclear energy as clean”. He further states, “one of the most expensive ways to generate electricity. Investing in cheaper low-carbon sources of energy will provide more emissions reductions per dollar.” Should present trajectories indeed signal a new era for nuclear power, a persistent challenge endures. Following 70 years of atomic energy utilization, consensus is still lacking regarding the disposal of accumulated radioactive waste, portions of which will retain their hazardous properties for hundreds of thousands of years. Numerous governments are exploring geological disposal as a solution, which involves interring waste in sealed tunnels far beneath the earth’s surface. However, only Finland has constructed such a site, and environmental advocates and anti-nuclear activists assert that disposing of waste in this manner is excessively perilous. Resolving this complex issue could be pivotal in determining the true emergence of a new nuclear power era.