With all the recent focus on so-called green technologies--wind, solar, and other alternative energy sources--we sometimes lose sight of one of the older non-fossil fuel technologies: nuclear power. There are a lot of complicated issues surrounding nuclear power, not the least of which is its being weaponizable. There was an interesting article that was kind of buried in the Friday New York Times that explores some of the issues.
The article is ostensibly about Russia diversifying its uranium sources by securing mining rights in Mongolia. Russia's state-owned power industry formed a joint-venture with Mongolia called Rosatom. The deal is part of a so-called land grab by Russia to ensure it has enough fuel to power its burgeoning nuclear power industry, including enrichment programs. Currently Russia provides about 50% of the fuel for the United States' nuclear plants. Russia is looking to expand its nuclear fuel exports to other nations looking to build up nuclear power, including China, India, and Iran.
Of course, any efforts to supply enriched uranium to countries such as Iran should be met by opposition from the United States and other nations. The US opposes Russia helping Iran build nuclear power plants, but it does not exactly oppose Russia sending Iran fuel. This stance, as the author suggests, seems to leave open the possibility of Iran and other countries working on their own enrichment programs. However, with Russia supplying the US with so much fuel, it is in a difficult position from which to negotiate.
After the scary events of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, Americans seem skeptical of the safety of nuclear power generation. A 1998 paper published the American Nuclear Society concludes that
Nuclear energy is safe, clean, and cheap, and it provides the answers to our energy problems. We must not allow misinformation and scare tactics to influence those making the important energy decisions.It seems as if the threat of another nuclear meltdown is somewhat outweighed by the positive benefits of nuclear power: It doesn't release the high level of carbon emissions of power plants that rely on fossil fuels. Nuclear power does, however, produce its own uniquely dangerous waste product in the for of spent fuel rods. The US Congress passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act in 1982. A later amendment to the act designated Yucca Mountain, Nevada as the permanent repository for nuclear waste products. However, one of the first energy-related actions of the Obama administration was to reject the use of Yucca Mountain for storing nuclear waste.
It's important to be cognizant of the rational pros and cons of nuclear power. However, as our energy needs grow more dire, I'm sure it will seem a more and more desirable option.
0 comments:
Post a Comment