The Future of Nuclear Power
The United States of America is the world’s largest producer of nuclear power, accounting for more than 30% of worldwide nuclear generation of electricity. Yet there is a vocal group of experts saying that nuclear power is too difficult and costly to expand. This, coupled with misconceptions from the public about what impact nuclear power has on the environment has stifled nuclear power growth in the United States since the late 1980s. Nuclear still has what it takes to be a larger part of the US energy infrastructure and can buy time for renewables to catch up and become more efficient while having a minimal impact on the environment.
#import modules
from datascience import *
%matplotlib inline
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import numpy as np
plt.style.use('fivethirtyeight')
#pull the us energy generation table found on the EIA site
usenergy = Table.read_table('usenergy.csv')
totalrenewable = usenergy.column('Other Renewables')
+ usenergy.column('Solar') +
usenergy.column('Hydroelectric Conventional')
allenergy = usenergy.with_column('Total Renewables', totalrenewable)
solar = allenergy.select('Period', 'Solar')`
This is the code I used to clean my data and produce the table below which was used for most of the charts/analysis.
Energy units in billion kWh
allenergywithp.drop(‘Renewables Percent’, ‘Total Generation’).plot(0)
Nuclear power is clean and nuclear fuel can be reused, reprocessed, and repurposed. Nearly 20% of the entire country’s electricity comes from nuclear power compared to 14% that comes from renewables. Coal and natural gas account for about 32% each. Although electricity from coal is on the decline, it still accounts for roughly a third of US electricity.
Most people know that coal has serious issues like producing acid rain and greenhouse gas emissions, but not everyone knows that coal also contains natural trace amounts uranium and thorium which is then burned. The harmful byproducts from the ash being released into the air is usually caught by devices in chimneys and smokestacks but why risk putting harmful radioactive elements into the atmosphere?
Nuclear reactors on the other hand, work through superheating water to power steam generators. The white plumes coming out of nuclear reactors are not the by-product of a nuclear experiment or explosion, it is just vaporized water.
Moreover, uranium is a much more efficient source of fuel than oil, coal, or natural gas. A single uranium pellet (0.00003 cubic feet) can contain as much energy as 19.9 cubic feet of oil, 40 cubic feet of coal, or 17,000 cubic feet of natural gas. Even better, that pellet can last for about six years before it needs to be reprocessed. After reprocessing into another form of uranium or plutonium, it can be used again or repurposed. It only takes about 11 pounds of uranium to power an American household for a year. The United States is second only to Canada when it comes to the average citizen’s energy consumption.
However, a nuclear-powered America is far from easily attainable. Nuclear power plants are costly and require skilled technicians and mechanics to maintain. Not to mention that they cost billions of dollars to construct. Coal is more readily available and small-town economies around America are built on it. Coal provides jobs and is an established industry. The issue is, long-term change is needed now. The environment is a real issue for not only Americans but people from all over the world. In order to preserve America’s coastlines, forests, and wildlife, the American people and federal government need to work together to find solutions.
The Data
Nuclear is not a cost-effective option in the short run but it is absolutely necessary for the preservation and protection of the environment. Renewable energy has not matured yet. It only accounts for about 14% of America’s total energy production. Embracing nuclear energy can buy time for renewable technologies to become sustainable and large producers of electricity. The relatively recent influx of capital into renewables research has shown great promise and nuclear energy is a logical bridge between oil, coal, and natural gas to hydro, solar, and wind.
totalrenewable = usenergy.column('Other Renewables') + usenergy.column('Solar') + usenergy.column('Hydroelectric Conventional')
allenergy = usenergy.with_column('Total Renewables', totalrenewable)
solar = allenergy.select('Period', 'Solar')
allenergy.select('Period','Solar', 'Total Renewables', 'Nuclear').barh('Period')
Looking at the data above compiled from the US Energy Information Administration, nuclear energy has mostly stagnated in production with the shuttering of nuclear power-plants and no further plans to build new reactors but nuclear infrastructure, knowledge, and expertise are all readily available and returns are easily calculable. With renewables, weather can adversely affect power generation and industry expertise is still growing to meet demand. Solar is still just a footnote in terms of total energy production. Total solar produced 67 billion kWh in 2018 but a single typical nuclear facility can produce 5 billion kWh in a year, about 13% of solar.
Nuclear power emits about 66g/kWh of greenhouse gas emissions over a facility’s lifetime due to construction, mining, and other factors which is higher than solar (13g/kWh) and wind (10g/kWh) but still much better than coal (1050g/kWh). Nuclear continues to show that it is the logical middle step in energy production. Nuclear fuel is also, at current levels of consumption, abundant and will last for the next 200 years according to the OECD’s Nuclear Energy Agency. Nuclear fuel reprocessing can extend this even longer.
allenergy.select('Period','Solar').plot(‘Period’, marker=’o’)
allenergy.select(‘Period’,‘Nuclear’).plot(‘Period’, marker=’o’)
The growth rate of solar also appears to be exponential with a growth rate of 48.43% which is an amazing development. That means by mid 2024 solar will overtake nuclear! But solar faces a large restraint that nuclear does not: location and hours of daylight. Solar panels will not be efficient in large parts of the US including the Mid-West, the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, and the Pacific Northwest. If the US Government created giant solar farms in the South and Southwest or even if solar conversion rates (currently 22%) increased, then solar may have a bright future but this still remains to be seen.
The United States is near the bottom of the pack at 20% compared to the rest of the world, though the US consumes much more energy. (Source: IAEA)
Lawmakers, the American people, and the private sector can take the necessary action to make increased nuclear power a reality. Subsidies and incentives for nuclear power plant construction, investing in small-form (cheaper) nuclear reactors and other technologies, retraining coal and oil mechanics and laborers for nuclear-based industries, and spreading the information of how green nuclear technology is, can all make it easier for nuclear power to expand across the United States.
Nuclear power can position the United States to be a more sustainable country but also secure its energy future. While oil and other natural resources cause harm to the environment and have short life-cycles, nuclear energy is relatively more recyclable and environmentally conscious.
Recommendations
Environmentally minded US companies should not only be making the push for renewable energy but for all green energy, including nuclear, collaboratively and they should establish a principal’s level advisory group to push forward promising green tech and energy on a national and global scale.
US companies together with local governments should begin a public awareness campaign on nuclear and dispel common myths surrounding the industry and establish job-transition programs for those in the energy industry where jobs are being lost.
If nuclear is still too cost-prohibitive, together with the US Government, US companies should explore options and opportunities to aggressively fund promising solar technology through research grants and low-interest loans.
