Nuclear energy going into the future

At present, 5% of the world's global energy supply and 11% of the world's electricity supply comes from nuclear energy. However the potential for this to increase is quite clear. The World Nuclear Performance Report (2016) estimates that nuclear energy could provide up to 17% of the world's energy supply by 2050. Despite this immense potential to create an even diverse energy mix, some countries are still apprehensive about adopting nuclear power as an energy source and this has mainly been driven by the events that enfolded in Fukushima during 2011 (Chu and Majumdar 2012 writing in 'Nature'). Throughout the entirety of this blog, I have been quite neutral in terms of my assessment of nuclear power however I would like to make it clear in this post that I am quite pro-nuclear. However, if we are to make nuclear energy a success story, there are two main hurdles in my opinion which we must deal with - security risks and nuclear scepticism:


Geopolitical risks from nuclear power:

Concern regarding the security threats posed by terrorists and other entities on nuclear energy installations is entirely justified given the numerous threats issued. On top of this, as mentioned in my earlier blog posts, many of the world's nuclear installations are also based in areas where the risk of terrorism is quite high. Threats do not just come from terrorist outfits, but also from states such as North Korea who are developing their nuclear programs, often for malicious purposes. Well, how can we solve this problem? That is the prevailing question that all international organisations and countries are faced with and there are no simple solutions.

An interesting solution put forward by Bleek and Lorber (2014), one I agree with, is that certain countries around the world need to be given security guarantees in order to reduce nuclear proliferation risks. In simpler terms, it means that if a country that does not have a nuclear weapons program is threatened, countries and international organisations should support the country militarily in the case of a conflict. This could deter non-nuclear weapon holding countries from developing their own weapons. Another solution to deal with nuclear security threats is to increase security along nuclear installations. At present, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has provided countries with specialist equipment and training to ensure that their nuclear security is meeting international standards. However, I still believe that individual countries must also play their part to ensure that their nuclear facilities are secured to an acceptable extent. It only takes one event like Fukushima to derail the positive effect that nuclear energy can play in our energy system.

Nuclear scepticism

Another key hurdle in the successful use of nuclear energy is public opposition. A poll from Ipos Mori in 2011, which gathered opinions from over 24 countries, suggested that 62% of people were against nuclear power. This resentment has given way to nuclear energy being contested by large scale NGOs such as Greenpeace, but also by citizen led movements propping up all around the world. One which comes to my mind is the one in Taiwan during March 2014 where 130,000 people marched against a government decision to build more nuclear plants.

Protest in Taiwan against the building of nuclear power plants in March 2014

The sensible thing to do in the face of public opposition, is not to ignore and silence people, but to listen to their objections and grievances. As Rolf and Ingermar (1992) rightly explain, citizen uprisings must not always been seen as selfish reactions. When deciding to build nuclear power plants, ordinary people must be included in the decision-making process through public consultations and feedback sessions. This could limit opposition and ensure that a consensus is reached. A key example of this is the consultation that EDF has carried out in regards to the building of the Sizewell C nuclear power station on the Suffolk coast. Feedback and surveys in this example have changed the initial plans and have made sure that the concerns of ordinary people are listened to - have a look at this video below: 

Another interesting solution to public opposition is offered by Kiran Stacey in the Financial Times, in which she suggests that small modular reactors could be built. These small scale, moveable reactors are cost efficient and would be likely to reduce public opposition as their noise generation is also at a minimum.

The future for nuclear power is bright, however public opposition and security risks must be considered and dealt with effectively. Nuclear power is an alternative to the greenhouse gas emitting coal and oil and offers a vital opportunity to transform economies, lives and our society in general (believe me, I am not exaggerating). 

To end on a funnier note, enjoy the 'Nuclear Power Song' which is performed by Environment Man. It will surely lighten up your mood: