Nuclear Energy - The Green Solution
The United States with less than 5% of the world's population
consumes roughly 25% of the world's energy. Some might argue
that this is egregious, while others would say that it is simply
a yardstick by which the world's largest economy is measured.
But for whatever the reason for our vast consumption of energy,
the fact remains that in order to consume you first have to
produce. And as most of our energy comes from burning fossil
fuels- which wouldn't be too bad except that:
(1) burning vast amounts of fossil fuels in this county alone
dumps millions of pounds of earth warming greenhouse gasses
into, what appears, is a fragile atmosphere, every day. Just
warming up the atmosphere a couple of degrees on average has
significant impact. Look no further than last year's hurricane
season. The worst on record. And...
(2) let's not forget its close cousin; smog pollution, which
adds to respiratory problems and other health conditions, not to
mention the visual blight hanging over our cities as well. In
addition...
(3) have you filled your tank recently? Paid the heating bill?
The cost of all fossil fuels, even coal has increased
significantly. As other emerging economies such as China and
India vie for ever more limited resources, all bets are that the
costs will continue to climb over the long haul. Moreover...
(4) as we import most of our oil nowadays- we are increasingly
held hostage to an unstable supply from a number of countries
that we, for whatever reasons, are increasingly unpopular with.
The end game? If our supply of oil is not first arbitrarily cut
off, as it becomes increasingly scarce the price will rise until
our growth is strangled. In either case we will feel impelled to
engage in war with other rising powers to secure our supplies.
The bottom line: Fossil fuels are not only hazardous to our
health (and the planet's) but may in fact be hazardous to the
American way of life.
But if energy is the lifeblood of our economy what are we to do?
Wind? Solar? While anything we can do other than consume fossil
fuels will help, these sources of energy are relatively diffuse
and inconsistent. In other words, their "cost to calorie" ratios
are not efficient and they are not always dependable. As James
Kunstler points out in his intriguing book The Long
Emergency, one of our best options out of these dilemmas is
to do an "Apollo Project" type effort to develop additional, new
nuclear energy capability. As it turns out, it just may be the
greenest, viable alternate we have.
The U.S. currently produces about 20% of its electrical power
from nuclear power. The advantages are; that there are no
greenhouse emissions into the atmosphere, no visual pollution,
it is cost relatively cost effective, quiet and we have
sufficient supply of uranium here at home for the foreseeable
future to provide for a major portion of our energy needs.
Historically, at least, the problem with nuclear energy has been
primarily two fold. First, the "China Syndrome" problem of a
meltdown of a reactor which could release a large amount of
radioactivity and second, what do we do with nuclear waste
material that has a half-life of over 25,000 years! The
perception of these two significant obstacles might doom a new
nuclear drive and stand in the way of an energy-independent
United States.
However, there are new technologies in this field that, like the
cavalry, have come to our rescue- and none too soon. First,
there is a new class of nuclear reactors that have their nuclear
fuel so structured that they cannot do a melt down. Turn off the
cooling to this new nuclear reactor and it only gets a bit
hotter. No big deal. Turn the cooling back on and it runs more
efficiently. Okay, one down. But what about all that radioactive
spent reactor fuel? Let's see if we can put some perspective on
it. If you gathered all the spent nuclear fuel in this country
under one roof it would fill a typical high school gym. Not too
unmanageable. Moreover, the spent fuel is encapsulated in super
strong glass beads, which in turn are embedded into hardened
concrete inside steel drums. This makes the waste product
"transportable" and is designed to withstand the elements for
10,000 years. Nevertheless, even in it's tomb it is still
relativity radioactive. Most of these drums are stored in water
as radiation cannot penetrate more than about 3 feet of water.
However, no one seems anxious to have it in their back yards. A
political hot potato to be sure.
But while our politicians don't have the answer, the earth does.
The answer lies in the bottom of the Marianas Trench in the
Pacific. It is the deepest place in the ocean (over seven miles)
and one of the fastest moving subduction plates on earth. If the
drums of waste were placed in the bottom of the trench, they
would, within a few hundred years, be swallowed up into the
bowels of the earth and blend into the earth's core where heat
and pressure (caused in part by radioactive substances contained
within the earth) rendered insignificant.
Given the current geopolitical situation, which only seems to be
working to our disadvantage, limited resources for cheap fossil
fuels, not to mention the environmental impacts we are starting
to experience, it is time we take drastic measures to get us off
our fossil fuel addition. Let's hope we are not too late.