Nuclear Power: Friend or Foe?

You hear the word "nuclear" and all sorts of things come to mind--none of them good. Rogue nations enriching uranium to wipe out half the map...solid citizens carrying placards and chanting "No nukes!" as a radioactive generators threaten to be built in their families' backyards ...presidential candidates trying extra hard not to mispronounce that tricky word as "nucular."

But when it comes to nuclear power as an energy source, there are many things to recommend it.

The Pro Argument

• Nuclear power is efficient. It is possible to generate a high amount of electrical energy in one single plant.

• No air pollution. Nuclear power emits relatively low amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2). The emissions of green house gases are next to zilch. Furthermore, nuclear power plants contribute almost nothing to global warming.

• This technology is currently available, unlike the other great ideas that still need to be developed.



• The nuclear power industry creates high-paying, highly skilled domestic jobs that won't be "offshored."

The Con Argument


However, the negatives of nuclear power are many. Consider:

• Two words: nuclear waste. The problem of disposing of radioactive waste is still an unsolved one. The waste from nuclear energy is extremely dangerous and it has to be carefully looked after for several thousand years (10,000 years according to United States Environmental Protection Agency standards).

• Does the name Chernobyl ring a bell? On April 26, 1986, a nuclear station in the former Soviet Union had a major melt down. The health consequences of this one incident are legendary. High cancer rates, deformed children, etc. And despite a generally high security standard, accidents can still happen. It is technically impossible to build a plant with 100% security. A small probability of failure will always last. The consequences of an accident would be absolutely devastating, both for human beings and for nature. The more nuclear plants that are built, the higher the probability of a disastrous failure somewhere else in the world.

• Then there is terrorism. Nuclear power plants make excellent targets for terrorist attacks. No atomic energy plant in the world could withstand an attack similar to 9/11.



• Nuclear power makes more than electricity. During the operation of nuclear power stations, radioactive waste is produced, which in turn can be used for the production of nuclear weapons. In addition, the same know-how used to design nuclear power plants can be used to build nuclear bombs. 

• Nuclear energy is not renewable. The energy source for nuclear energy is Uranium. Uranium is a scarce resource; its supply is estimated to last only for the next 30 to 60 years depending on the actual demand.

• Nuclear plants take time to build. When you consider all the licensing, planning, lobbying and building involved in a new nuclear power plant, it can take as many as 20 years in a democratic country like ours. In other words: It is an illusion to think we can build nuclear power plants quickly.

The Bottom Line


Nuclear energy has many advantages and the latest technology is making nuclear power plants safer and safer. But, for many people, the risks still outweigh the benefits. Nevertheless, the public continues to send mixed signals. For example, a recent New York Times poll showed that 51% of Americans approved of building more nuclear power stations. The flipside is that 55% disapproved of having a nuclear power plant in their community. Maybe we need a new bumper sticker. "Yes, Nukes. Just Not Here."

To for more advice on saving energy please visit dPi Energy

Tags: zilch, environmental protection agency, air pollution, cancer rates, energy source, former soviet union, backyards, health consequences, united states environmental protection agency, nuclear power plants, electrical energy, green house gases, presidential candidates