Nuclear power controversy From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search A nuclear power station. The nuclear reactors are inside the cylindrical containment buildings to the right - left is a cooling tower venting steam (literally fog or man-made cloud). A nuclear power station. The nuclear reactors are inside the cylindrical containment buildings to the right - left is a cooling tower venting steam (literally fog or man-made cloud). Chernobyl reactor 4 after the disaster, showing the extensive damage to the main reactor hall (image center) and turbine building (image lower left) Chernobyl reactor 4 after the disaster, showing the extensive damage to the main reactor hall (image center) and turbine building (image lower left)

Main article: Nuclear power

After a period of decline following the 1979 Three Mile Island accident and the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, there is a recently renewed interest in nuclear energy because it could partially address both dwindling oil reserves and global warming with far fewer emissions of greenhouse gases than fossil fuel.

The use of nuclear power is controversial because of the problem of storing radioactive waste for indefinite periods, the potential for possibly severe radioactive contamination by accident or sabotage, and the possibility that its use could in some countries lead to the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Proponents, including some national governments, claim that these risks are small and can be lessened with new technology. They note that France and all of the industrialised economies of Asia [1] see nuclear power as a key economic strategy, that the safety record is already good when compared to other energy forms, that it releases much less pollution than coal power, and that nuclear power is a sustainable energy source. Many environmental groups claim nuclear power is an uneconomic, unsound and potentially dangerous energy source, especially compared to renewable energy, and dispute whether the costs and risks can be reduced through new technology. Others claim that nuclear power is a renewable source of energy (see Renewable energy). Brasilia, Brazil , March, 15, 2005 - Greenpeace balloon in Brasilia and Lula Nuclear. Greenpeace protesting against Brazilian Nuclear Program. Photo:J. Freitas/Abr. Brasilia, Brazil , March, 15, 2005 - Greenpeace balloon in Brasilia and Lula Nuclear. Greenpeace protesting against Brazilian Nuclear Program. Photo:J. Freitas/Abr. Edward Teller as "the only victim of Three Mile Island" in his 1979 Wall Street Journal pro-nuclear ad, sponsored by Dresser Industries, the firm which had manufactured one of the defective valves which contributed to the accident. Edward Teller as "the only victim of Three Mile Island" in his 1979 Wall Street Journal pro-nuclear ad, sponsored by Dresser Industries, the firm which had manufactured one of the defective valves which contributed to the accident. Contents [hide]

* 1 Fuel cycle o 1.1 Fuel resources o 1.2 Reprocessing o 1.3 Solid waste * 2 Economics o 2.1 Capital costs o 2.2 Operating costs o 2.3 Subsidies o 2.4 Other economic issues * 3 Risks o 3.1 Accident or attack + 3.1.1 By reactor type # 3.1.1.1 BWR # 3.1.1.2 PWR # 3.1.1.3 Pebble bed reactor o 3.2 Air pollution o 3.3 Waste heat in water systems o 3.4 Health effect on population near nuclear plants o 3.5 Nuclear proliferation * 4 Links with military * 5 List of atomic energy groups * 6 References * 7 See also * 8 External links

[edit] Fuel cycle

[edit] Fuel resources

At the present rate of use, there are 50 years left of low-cost known uranium reserves - however, given that the cost of fuel is a minor cost factor for fission power, more expensive lower-grade sources of uranium could be used in the future [2] [3]. Other ideas include extraction from seawater and granite - although there is controversy on this issue. For arguments pro and against these ideas, see [4] and [5] (pro) and [6] (against).

Another alternative would be to use thorium as fission fuel in breeder reactors - thorium is three times more abundant in the Earth crust than uranium [7].

Current light water reactors make relatively inefficient use of nuclear fuel, leading to energy waste. More efficient reactor designs or nuclear reprocessing [8] would reduce the amount of waste material generated and allow better use of the available resources.

As opposed to current light water reactors which use Uranium-235 (0.7% of all natural uranium), fast breeder reactors use Uranium-238 (99.3% of all natural uranium). It has been estimated that there is anywhere from 10,000 to five billion years worth of Uranium-238 for use in these power plants [9]. Breeder technology has been used in several reactors [10]. Currently (December 2005), the only breeder reactor producing power is BN-600 [11] in Beloyarsk, Russia. (The electricity output of BN-600 is 600 MW - Russia has planned to build another unit, BN-800, at Beloyarsk nuclear power plant.) Also, Japan's Monju reactor is planned for restart (having been shut down since 1995), and both China and India intend to build breeder reactors.