What is the future of nuclear power?

Presentation on the Harris Nuclear Plant

The Friday before Spring Break I accompanied the Energy Club on their trip to the Harris Nuclear Plant in New Hill, NC. I was not a member of the Nicholas School Energy Club, but I had to jump at the opportunity to visit a nuclear power plant. There is such controversy around the nuclear industry that I had to see it for myself. So here I was thinking that we would be able to walk around the property and size up the cooling tower. To my disappointment, the closest we were able to get to the plant was the museum/learning center, which was composed of small exhibits, the simulation control room, and a presentation by an employee. It seems that security measures since 9/11 had denied us the experience that visitors were once granted. Nonetheless, I found the presentation and museum quite helpful in understanding the pros and cons nuclear power.

The Nicholas School Energy Club

In 2005, nuclear power actually comprised 32% of North Carolina's electricity source, with coal as the major source (source). Most of the nuclear power is generated by Progress Energy, who own and operate the Harris Nuclear Power Plant. Surprisingly, the plant is only 20 miles from Raleigh. Nuclear power plants are quite complicated. To break down the process simply, the main thing that distinguishes them from a coal or natural gas power plant is the way that the plants heat the steam that drives the turbines that generate the electricity. Instead of using coal or natural gas, uranium (U-235), the heaviest naturally occurring element, is used as fuel. By splitting the uranium into smaller atoms, a process known as fission, large amounts of energy are generated. After the initial reaction, a chain reaction begins to occur, where neutrons from one uranium atom collide with other uranium atoms, which causes them to split and release more neutrons.

At the crossroads of global warming solutions, nuclear power is receiving more acceptance as it does not release greenhouse gases like oil and coal plants. The employee who gave the presentation mentioned that the Harris nuclear plant was planning to expand. Even after the visit, the idea increasing nuclear power capacity is still hard for me to stomach. In my eyes, it certainly is not a "clean" energy source. Sure, it does not contribute to the carbon dioxide load, but there are many outstanding questions. The Harris plant depends on water from Harris Lake to keep the reactor cool. In a region already experiencing a drought, if the water level at the lake drops below a critical level, the plant will be forced to shut down. How dependable is this energy source? The next issue is the fate of the radioactive spent fuel. The answer has been to submerge the used fuel under water although more plants are beginning to recycle and enrich a portion of the fuel to capture as much energy as they can. Is cooling the planet by creating radioactive waste a reasonable tradeoff? Another issue is where to put these nuclear plants. No matter who you are, would you be comfortable with a nuclear facility going up down the street from you? Meltdowns are not common events, but I know that I am not dying to move next to a nuclear plant anytime soon. A case of NIMBY (not in my backyard) may make it hard for the industry to expand to new locations. The last question is what price are we willing to pay for nuclear power? Nuclear power is more expensive then conventional coal energy, which wouldn't matter as much if it were a low-impact energy source. Factoring in the externalities of both (including a projected carbon tax), which energy is the better buy?

As you can see, the trip generated more questions than answers.