Should Nuclear Power Be Revived in California and the United States - Research Paper Example

Running head: SHOULD NUCLEAR POWER BE REVIVED IN CALIFORNIA AND THE UNITED STATES? Should nuclear power be revived in California and the United States? Outline Introduction Importance of nuclear power Development imperative Substitute for natural gas and oil imports. Improved health and safety status International energy outlook Relation of energy to quality of life Can nuclear power solve the energy crisis? New economics of nuclear power Government subsidies for the nuclear power industry Divided response from the environmental community Prospects for improved nuclear safety Nuclear waste transportation and disposal 20th Century legacy of secrecy and deceit The petroleum era Expansion of global population Global climate References Should nuclear power be revived in California and the United States? Introduction The aftermath of using fossil fuel as a source of energy has recently revived the interest of incorporating nuclear power as a major source of energy. The need of reviving the use of nuclear power has further being aggravated by the ever-increasing population, thus increasing the demand of energy. Reliable operations and safety are the main requirements that lead to the approval of nuclear energy as a source of power generation (Rosen and Glasser, 1992, p. 308). Importance of nuclear power Development imperative On attaining a wealth of information from the US senate, senator Domenici indicated that human development is the creation of a surrounding where individuals can establish their maximum potential, as humans are considered the real wealth of the world; indeed, human development supersedes economic growth. The fact remains that we need energy to not only drive our industries, but also support our current trends of living. Lack of electricity has been identified as one of the perpetrators of poverty. In 1999, the United States was noted to consume approximately 25 percent of the world’s energy. Nevertheless, high consumption of electricity indicates the ever-changing lifestyle in United States’ growing population. Nuclear power generation as a way of diversifying the sources of electricity generation can not only free up fossil fuel, but also ensure the uses have no other substitutes. The result of use of nuclear power is a cleaner environment, creation of more job opportunities and maximum use of available raw material. According to Sir Ingham, based on rational discourse, nuclear power should be viewed based as the foundation of man’s sustainable power that has no offence to the surrounding environment (Domenici, Lyons and Steyn, 2004, p. 182, 183 & 184). Substitute for natural gas and oil imports. Increase in population brings about high demand of energy. This high demand of energy hence forces the country to import energy, which could lead to political instability and lack of cost control. According to Domenici, Lyons and Steyn (2004), reliance of imported energy has been predicted to rise from 50 percent to 70 percent in the decades to come within the European countries. Heavy reliance of imported energy may have negative global impact and hence United States should have an equilibrium energy policy that incorporates healthy reliance on nuclear power in order to suppress the ever-increasing competition of fossil fuel supply in the decades to come. America will encounter stiff competition from fast developing countries and the European Union countries for supply of imported energy and hence the best option will be for the country to incorporate the nuclear energy option and attain the diversification of electricity. The heavy reliance of natural gas and oil imports will not only lead the United States to a dangerous path but also return the nation to the situation it was fifty years ago regarding foreign oil imports. According to the research undertaken by EIA, 39 percent of US’ energy is bound to be imported as indicated statistically in 2002 when 29 percent of the country’s energy was imported. This situation leads to many unanswered questions as the United States has a vast resource of coal and a well-developed nuclear capability (Domenici, Lyons and Steyn, 2004, p. 184, 185). According to a study conducted by the Energy Department EIA, 6,000 MWe of nuclear power was enough to reduce the usage and cost of natural gas by 3 percent as we head to the year 2020. The 3 percent reduction is translated to a whooping 3.6 billion dollars annually saved by American consumers and businesses (Domenici, Lyons and Steyn, 2004, p. 184, 186). Improved health and safety status Nuclear technology is not only used in the provision of electricity but also saving of lives in terms of cancer patients. The radiation used in this technology kills the lurking cancer cells after removal of tumors. It is approximated that there are about 10 million diagnostic and nuclear medicine procedures that are conducted each year with the sole aim of saving American lives. In addition to this, the safety of the medicine taken by patients is ensured by Food and Drug Administration by use of radioactive tracers. Food irradiation not only makes our food last longer but also safer. Food contamination can also be avoided by the use of the nuclear energy as it can cut down the high statistic of food borne bacteria that is attributed to thousands of deaths and illness each in America annually. According to Domenici, Lyons and Steyn no scientific danger has been attributed to food irradiation. Wastage of food is reduced as the life threatening bacteria is killed and the life of the food prolonged (Domenici, Lyons and Steyn, 2004, p. 186) International energy outlook Internationally the nuclear industry is predicted to collapse by at the end of this century. This can result due to a number of reasons. Among these reasons is the high costs incurred, nuclear fuel cycle and waste dilemmas. Russia on one hand has incorporated closed fuel cycle despite its costs and severe environmental consequences while on the other hand United Kingdom, Germany, Japan, and France also reprocess SNF (Digges and Nikiforov, 2003, par 2). The use of nuclear energy in the production of electric power has been greatly being influenced by measures set aside that include safety and reliability in the operations. In addition to this, the competitive energy costs also play a major role. In the mid 1950s, the HTGR was revived in a number of countries that included United Kingdom, Germany, and the US (Rosen and Glasser, 1992, p. 308). Relation of energy to quality of life Nuclear power will not only provide access of electricity to the growing demand but also improve the health and safety of the population. Radiation has been proved to kill cancerous cells especially after the removal of the tumor. Millions of nuclear medicine procedures conducted annually have been attributed to nuclear technologies. Food irradiation is one of the nuclear technologies used to make the supply of food last longer and remain safe. Food irradiation has scientifically being absolved from any danger and instead reputed for reducing the rates of food borne bacteria that cause thousands of illness and deaths. By killing, the bacteria there will be a reduction in the wastage of food as the shelf life of the food is increased. Increase in safety is enhanced by use of nuclear technology in testing materials used in making of the airplanes. The toughness and the strength of the materials are tested (Domenici, Lyons and Steyn, 2004, p. 186 & 187). Can nuclear power solve the energy crisis? Nuclear power has been identified as exorbitantly expensive and not fully reliable. This has hence turned away many investors willing to venture in this industry. The risk involved in case of an accident is bound to destroy all the investments with a single blow. Energy crisis cannot be solved by nuclear power alone but with the collaboration of other renewable cheap sources that include wind, geothermal and biomass. According to Caldicott, of the other cheap renewable sources of energy can save the United States 20 percent of electricity currently being consumed. Although nuclear power can be used to reduce dependency on foreign oil, the fact remains that oil and its products are essential in fueling the internal combustion engines in automobiles. Oil in other words oil contributes to a minimal amount of 2 percent of United States’ electricity (Caldicott, 2006). New economics of nuclear power Capital costs are highly incurred especially when the plant in question is under construction. Expenditure incurred on the equipment, labor and engineering is included in the capital costs. On completion of the plant, the electricity sales will hence be used to cover the fuel costs and the overnights incurred. According to the University of Chicago the technologies involved in alternative reactor mainly generates various cost estimates (WNA Report, n.d, p. 19). Generally, nuclear power has been characterized by both low operating costs and higher construction. In considering these two costs in the new economics of nuclear power, the general cost of nuclear power tends to be a little bit cheaper as compared to fossil fuel or any other form of electricity generating technology (WNA Report, n.d, p. 19). Government subsidies for the nuclear power industry According to the WNA report, the government plays a regulatory role through safety oversight and licensing. This role played by the government ensures efficiency and upholding of competitive nuclear economics. In the long term, nuclear power does not require subsidy. The measures undertaken by the government to stimulate nuclear investments are mainly focused in serving environmental aims and geopolitical (WNA Report, n.d, p. 9). Assistance is needed to for the sole purpose of indicating economic viability of nuclear this though should not near an extension of government subsidy indefinitely into the future (Deutch et al, 2009, p. 10). Divided response from the environmental community Among the first nuclear plant built in United States was essentially constructed for Duquesne Power and Light. This was as a result of the Pittsburgh residents being fed up with the pollution. Construction of a coal plant would have only added more problems. The nuclear plant was hence beneficial in the sense that it produces green energy. Later in the decades that followed environmentalists having been unanimously agreeing that environmental catastrophe can be avoided by use of nuclear power to provide clean energy (Domenici, Lyons and Steyn, 2004, p. 186) Prospects for improved nuclear safety Improved operations and the safety record have been parallel to each other. The two are coupled because the operations which are reliable normally avoids challenges to the existing safety systems and the operating and maintenance activities that are required for reliable operation are the same activities required for safety. Nuclear power is suggested to have the highest capacity factor among the existing generation of technologies (Deutch et al, 2009, p. 10). Nuclear waste transportation and disposal The conclusion of the study conducted in 2003 was that an explicit strategy was needed to store already used fuel for a lengthy period in order to create flexibility in the waste management system. Dry cask spent fuel storage (SFS) is being implemented in large scale although they have not been opened due to prohibition by the Nuclear waste policy act of 1987. Based on the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, the DOE submitted the Yucca Mountain repository application in 2008. The license review was mandated and funds provided to the NRC by the congress. In summation, the process of high waste disposal is regarded not to have achieved positive results (Deutch et al, 2009, p. 11). 20th Century legacy of secrecy and deceit It is difficult to establish the commercial development of nuclear power. Few doubts have arisen from the effect of anti-nuclear movements on the political scenery. In numerous countries, these anti-nuclear movements gave rise to ecological movements. The main core of the secrecy in nuclear activities is dated back in the development of the first nuclear weapons where there was total black out of secrecy (Bunche, 1979, p. 34) The petroleum era Geopolitical and unanticipated challenges are some of the factors that stress the reason as to why America’s energy should be produced by diverse sources. Imported oil has not only created barriers in exercising of the country’s foreign policy but also its petroleum feedstock has no substitutes. Natural gas high prices on the other hand have slowed the rate job growth and economic recovery (Domenici, Lyons and Steyn, 2004, p. 184). Expansion of global population According to the research carried out by the United Nations (UN), the human population is expected to project upwards by more than 1.5 billion by 2020. Whatever the case the bottom line is that there will be an increase in the human population and that implies an increase in the demand of energy. Identification of diverse sources of energy will hence be the main concept to be emphasized if the world is to survive. According to Domenici, Lyons and Steyn it is our moral duty to put in place proper mechanisms that will provide will not only provide the required energy in our country but also the rest of the world. In 2003, the leaders of the top national laboratories wrote to the energy secretary affirming their position on the development imperative. In their letter, the leaders indicated the importance of energy stating that not only is energy vital in civilization of humans but also it is the heart of global stability, national security, and economic prosperity. The United States is looked upon to lead the way in developing and attaining alternative and diverse energy mechanism that will not only attend to the ever-growing need of energy but also achieve prosperity and peace. It is in this diverse energy system that nuclear energy falls in place as an alternative source of energy (Domenici, Lyons and Steyn, 2004, p.181). Global climate Nationally countries have recognized the important role played by nuclear power in achieving policy objectives. Some of these objectives include reduction of green house gas. This hence shifts the focus to global warming which in turn directs the attention to nuclear power as a non-carbon emitting technology (WNA Report, n.d, p. 10). According to Deutch et al the most reliable mechanism will be between cap and trade system or carbon emission tax (Deutch et al, 2009, p. 10) References Bunche, J. (1979). Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Chicago: Educational Foundation for nuclear science. Caldicott, H. (2006). Nuclear Power is Not the answer. NY: The New Press. Retrieved from https://eee.uci.edu/10f/53200/caldicott.pdf Deutch, J. M. et al. (2009). Update of the MIT 2003 Future of Nuclear Power. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Retrieved from http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/pdf/nuclearpower-update2009.pdf. Digges, C. and Nikiforov, V. (2003). Is Nuclear Power Reaching Its Sunset Years? Retrieved from http://www.bellona.org/english_import_area/international/russia/nuke_industry/31224. Domenici, P. V., Lyons, J. B. and Steyn, J. J., (2004). A Brighter Tomorrow: Fulfilling the promise of Nuclear Energy. MA: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Retrieved from https://eee.uci.edu/10f/53200/domenici.pdf. Rosen, L. and Glasser, R. (1992). Climate change and energy policy. NY: American institute of physics. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=gy8hgCGEkzEC&pg=PA307&dq=reviving+of+nuclear+power+in+california+and+USA&cd=1#v=onepage&q&f=false. WNA Report. (N.d). The New Economics for Nuclear Power. London: World Nuclear association. Retrieved from http://www.world-nuclear.org/reference/pdf/economics.pdf. Read More