Going Nuclear

Thirteen years ago, the most powerful earthquake ever recorded in Japan struck the country’s northeastern coast. The aftershocks created a tsunami that wrecked three nuclear reactors in Fukushima. The reactors largely melted within three days, and tens of thousands of people were evacuated as radiation leaked into the sea and the air.

Following the disaster, Japan swore to phase out nuclear power by 2030. But that was then. In a shift, the country now plans to extend the life span of its reactors, replace old ones, and build new ones.

Japan is hardly alone. In response to rising energy prices, fuel shortages, and pressure to cut carbon emissions, other nations have begun to re-embrace nuclear energy. In the past 15 years, France has replaced almost all of its fossil fuel-powered electricity with nuclear power; in 2020, the United Arab Emirates opened its first nuclear power plant; and China has more than 20 nuclear power plants under construction.

Thirteen years ago, Japan recorded its most powerful earthquake ever. It struck the country’s northeastern coast. The aftershocks created a tsunami that wrecked three nuclear reactors in Fukushima. The reactors largely melted within three days. Tens of thousands of people were evacuated. Radiation leaked into the sea and the air.

Following the disaster, Japan swore to phase out nuclear power by 2030. But that was then. In a shift, the country now plans to extend the life span of its reactors and replace old ones. They also plan to build new ones.

Japan is hardly alone. In response to rising energy prices, fuel shortages, and pressure to cut carbon emissions, other nations have begun to re-embrace nuclear energy. In the past 15 years, France has replaced almost all of its fossil fuel-powered electricity with nuclear power. In 2020, the United Arab Emirates opened its first nuclear power plant. China has more than 20 nuclear power plants under construction.

In the U.S., a new nuclear power reactor opened last summer in Georgia—the nation’s first to be built from scratch in almost three decades.

“I think we are in a moment of change,” says Peter Kuznick, director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University in Washington, D.C. “There’s a sense of urgency that we have to find alternatives to fossil fuels.”

But nuclear energy remains a divisive issue because of its high costs, and lingering fears of both nuclear disasters and nuclear war.

In the U.S., a new nuclear power reactor opened last summer in Georgia. It was the nation’s first to be built from scratch in almost three decades.

“I think we are in a moment of change,” says Peter Kuznick, director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University in Washington, D.C. “There’s a sense of urgency that we have to find alternatives to fossil fuels.”

But nuclear energy remains a divisive issue because of its high costs. There are also lingering fears of both nuclear disasters and nuclear war.

The nuclear power industry owes its existence to the development of nuclear weapons in the 1940s and 1950s. Nuclear weapons have only been used once in warfare, when the U.S. detonated two atomic bombs, over Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, instantly killing some 70,000 people and forcing Japan to surrender to end World War II. After the war, the U.S. government devised peaceful uses for atomic energy.

Coal was the fuel most widely used to generate electricity. But it became clear that nuclear energy could also produce electricity for commercial use. The world’s first nuclear-powered electricity plant opened in the city of Obninsk, in what was then the Soviet Union, in 1954. Three years later, the Vallecitos nuclear power plant opened in Sunol, California. By 1990, more than a hundred reactors dotted the American landscape.

The nuclear power industry owes its existence to the development of nuclear weapons in the 1940s and 1950s. Nuclear weapons have only been used once in warfare. The U.S. detonated two atomic bombs, over Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, instantly killing some 70,000 people. It forced Japan to surrender to end World War II. After the war, the U.S. government devised peaceful uses for atomic energy.

Coal was the fuel most widely used to generate electricity. But it became clear that nuclear energy could also produce electricity for commercial use. The world’s first nuclear-powered electricity plant opened in the city of Obninsk, in what was then the Soviet Union, in 1954. Three years later, the Vallecitos nuclear power plant opened in Sunol, California. By 1990, more than a hundred reactors dotted the American landscape.

However, nuclear technology proved more expensive than anticipated. And safety concerns arose. A partial meltdown at the Three Mile Island plant in Pennsylvania in 1979 brought the risks of nuclear power to the forefront. Other serious accidents, such as the 1986 disaster in Chernobyl—in the Soviet Union—and in Fukushima in 2011, fueled public distrust. Nuclear meltdowns emit radiation that can travel hundreds of miles and can cause skin blisters, hair loss, cancers, and death. Chernobyl’s meltdown dispersed radiation over a 58,000-square-mile area, roughly the land area of Michigan; its radioactivity far exceeded that produced by the atomic bombs dropped over Japan.

But in recent years, the pendulum has begun to shift again. Climate change has led world leaders to look toward renewable energy—such as wind and solar—and reconsider nuclear as a form of cleaner energy. Unlike coal, oil, and natural gas, which produce CO₂ emissions that can heat up the planet, nuclear power is a low-carbon-emission energy.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has also spurred many countries to look for alternatives to Russian oil and natural gas, with the United States, the United Kingdom, and other nations imposing import bans.

“Countries [are] more interested in having diverse energy sources that are less vulnerable to international implications,” says Thomas Wellock, a historian at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in Washington, D.C.

However, nuclear technology proved more expensive than anticipated. Safety concerns arose. A partial meltdown at the Three Mile Island plant in Pennsylvania in 1979 brought the risks of nuclear power to the forefront. Other serious accidents fueled public distrust. Those were the 1986 disaster in Chernobyl—in the Soviet Union—and the Fukushima one in 2011. Nuclear meltdowns emit radiation that can travel hundreds of miles. It can cause skin blisters, hair loss, cancers, and death. Chernobyl’s meltdown dispersed radiation over a 58,000-square-mile area. That’s roughly the size of the land area of Michigan. Its radioactivity exceeded that produced by the atomic bombs dropped over Japan.

But in recent years, the pendulum has begun to shift again. Climate change has led world leaders to look toward renewable energy—such as wind and solar. And leaders are reconsidering nuclear as a form of cleaner energy. Coal, oil, and natural gas produce CO2 emissions that can heat up the planet. Nuclear power is a low-carbon-emission energy.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has also spurred many countries to look for alternatives to Russian oil and natural gas. The United States, the United Kingdom, and other nations imposed import bans.

“Countries [are] more interested in having diverse energy sources that are less vulnerable to international implications,” says Thomas Wellock, a historian at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in Washington, D.C.

In the U.S., Congress has shown bipartisan support for expanding nuclear energy. Even after a dozen nuclear reactors were shut down in the past decade, the U.S. remains the world’s largest producer of nuclear energy. Its 93 reactors generate about 18 percent of the electricity in the country. (Globally, nuclear energy accounts for almost 10 percent of electricity production.)

In 2021, the federal Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provided billions of dollars in incentives to keep old nuclear plants running for the next decade.

As for new reactors, the one added over the summer at Plant Vogtle near Waynesboro, Georgia, is the latest to enter commercial operation. And a new generation of smaller and more cost-effective reactors are in the works.

 But not everyone is on board. Nuclear power facilities are still expensive to build, and despite safety improvements, the threat of disaster still looms. Additionally, radioactive waste is difficult to dispose of safely and remains hazardous for thousands of years.

In the U.S., Congress has shown bipartisan support for expanding nuclear energy. A dozen nuclear reactors were shut down in the past decade. But the U.S. remains the world’s largest producer of nuclear energy. Its 93 reactors generate about 18 percent of the electricity in the country. (Globally, nuclear energy accounts for almost 10 percent of electricity production.)

In 2021, the federal Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provided billions of dollars in incentives to keep old nuclear plants running for the next decade.

As for new reactors, the one added over the summer at Plant Vogtle near Waynesboro, Georgia, is the latest to enter commercial operation. A new generation of smaller and more cost-effective reactors are in the works.

But not everyone is on board. Nuclear power facilities are still expensive to build. Despite safety improvements, the threat of disaster still looms. Additionally, radioactive waste is difficult to dispose of safely. It remains hazardous for thousands of years.

Those are among the concerns that led Germany to shut down its three remaining reactors last April, ending nuclear power generation in Europe’s largest economy.

“I don’t think the merits of [nuclear] technology have changed that much,” says Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety with the Union of Concerned Scientists, a watchdog group that has expressed doubts about the safety of nuclear power.

But others in the U.S., including President Biden, view nuclear power along with renewable energy as crucial tools for fighting climate change. Biden has declared a goal of eliminating fossil fuels as a form of energy generation by 2035.

“The Biden administration has been very clear that we will get to the net zero goals,” Kathryn Huff, assistant secretary for nuclear energy at the Department of Energy, said at the American Nuclear Society conference in 2022. “They’re incredibly aggressive goals, and nuclear is a part of that solution, a very big part potentially.”

Those are among the concerns that led Germany to shut down its three remaining reactors last April. This ended nuclear power generation in Europe’s largest economy.

“I don’t think the merits of [nuclear] technology have changed that much,” says Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety with the Union of Concerned Scientists, a watchdog group that has expressed doubts about the safety of nuclear power.

But others in the U.S., including President Biden, view nuclear power along with renewable energy as crucial tools for fighting climate change. Biden has declared a goal of eliminating fossil fuels as a form of energy generation by 2035.

“The Biden administration has been very clear that we will get to the net zero goals,” Kathryn Huff, assistant secretary for nuclear energy at the Department of Energy, said at the American Nuclear Society conference in 2022. “They’re incredibly aggressive goals, and nuclear is a part of that solution, a very big part potentially.”