Nuclear Power As Supplemental Energy

By Mieke Lek

Some would consider nuclear power to be almost a perfect sustainable energy source. However, there are some factors which make nuclear power plants unsustainable, such as mining for resources and producing physical contaminants [1]. Due to this, nuclear energy is not an ideal energy source on its own; it should be supplemented by other energy sources. Nuclear energy is much more reliable than solar and wind energy, and it is much less harmful than the burning of fossil fuels.

Original image can be found here.

Nuclear energy provides a consistent stream of energy for our power grids. It is not conditional like wind energy or solar energy, which needs specific weather conditions in order to run effectively [2]. We cannot rely on these clean sources on their own as we would not have enough energy to power our communities. However, we still need these renewable energy sources since nuclear power plants are not completely renewable. They produce approximately 34,000 m3 of radioactive waste per year, and these particular radioactive isotopes have a very long half-life. This waste is hazardous to human and animal health as it can cause cancer, and bone and blood diseases [1], which is one consideration as to why it should only be used as a supplement to the renewable energy sources to minimize the amount of contaminants. 

Additionally, nuclear energy, while having some harmful environmental factors, is still much less environmentally damaging than the physical habitat changes and greenhouse gas emissions stemming from fossil fuels. Mining for coal is a dangerous task and can cause underground fires, and the habitat above the mine must be cleared before starting. We use the method of fracking (injecting liquid into the ground, which forces the rock open in order to access the oil underneath) in order to obtain natural gases and petroleum, which can cause small earthquakes, and the chemicals used can contaminate the area’s water supply [1]. These methods also release greenhouse gases which pollute our air and deplete the ozone layer, whereas nuclear power does not [1,2]. Nuclear power plants only take up urban space, thus minimizing the effect on wildlife habitats [1]. While we do also have to mine for Uranium-235, much like we have to mine for coal, we need much less uranium than we do coal for the same amount of power. One ½ inch uranium pellet produces the same amount of energy as 3 tonnes of coal, meaning we would have to mine for coal much more [3].

Therefore, nuclear power on its own is not ideal in terms of still producing waste, but it is perfect to supplement the less reliable but renewable energies such as solar and wind power, and it is still much cleaner and more sustainable than fossil fuels. 

[1] E. Morse, “Non-renewable energy,” National Geographic Resource Library, Feb. 21, 2013. [Online]. Available: https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/non-renewable-energy/#:~:text=Fossil%20fuels%20are%20the%20leading,There%20are%20others%2C%20however.&text=Nuclear%20energy%20is%20usually%20considered,nuclear%20power%20plants%20is%20not. [Accessed Sept. 14, 2020].

[2] J. Unwin, “Nuclear power: the pros and cons of the energy source,” PowerTechnology, May 28, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.power-technology.com/features/nuclear-power-pros-cons/. [Accessed Sept. 14, 2020].

[3] Center for Sustainable Systems, "Nuclear Energy Factsheet," University of Michigan. 2019. [Online]. Available: http://css.umich.edu/factsheets/nuclear-energy-factsheet#:~:text=A%20uranium%20fuel%20pellet%20(1,or%203%20barrels%20of%20oil.&text=Typical%20reactors%20hold%2018%20million%20pellets. [Accessed Sept. 14, 2020].

[4]  Canadian Nuclear Association, “CANDU Technologies,” Canadian Nuclear Association, 2015. [Online] https://cna.ca/technology/energy/candu-technology/. [Accessed October 2, 2020].