The Future of Nuclear Power in a Low-Carbon World
If the U.S. decides to make advanced nuclear reactors part of its own decarbonization road map, innovations such as these open up the potential for these technologies to compete with and complement renewables, said Abdulla. Applications for advanced nuclear power can be grouped in four main buckets, with providing “firm power” (constant electricity supply) to the grid being “by far the dominant mission” for advanced nuclear, he noted. The other potential applications include powering energy-intensive industrial processes like steel and cement production, supplying energy for the production of hydrogen, which could replace fossil fuels, and supporting water desalination efforts.
“Advanced nuclear could play a role, but economics and the use cases for how it might balance with renewables is still a bit uncertain,” said Ford. He noted that government incentives helped nurture advancements in solar and wind technologies, drastically bringing down the cost of deployment. “The government can also help here by continuing to do things to incentivize growth that they’ve done with other energy technologies. Production tax credits, investment tax credits, power purchase agreements that will incentivize development of these technologies — those things can be done today.” Adopting those policies now would keep the option of nuclear energy open for the U.S. in the decades to come.
Addressing Community Concerns
Large-scale nuclear accidents such as such as the meltdowns at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and most recently Fukushima have understandably raised public concern about and opposition to reliance on nuclear power in many communities. There are also ever-present concerns over the environmental impacts of nuclear reactors, including the water usage and waste heat added to waterways by light water reactors, the effects of uranium mining and its leftover tailings, and spent fuel that will remain radioactive for millennia.
If the U.S. chooses to pursue next generation nuclear reactors, steps need to be taken to ensure that the public is aware of the potential risks and benefits. “We know people might have issues with nuclear power,” said Abdulla. “We know what they want to know if you propose a facility in their proximate location … there are discussions we can have, and things we can do” to help alleviate those concerns.
Companies should engage the community early and often, understand what the needs are, and be willing to walk away, if they can’t adequately address community concerns, said Ford. “There’s been some very good examples of how to [engage communities] and maybe how not to do it.” Getting community buy-in, along with issues of energy justice and equity, have often been overlooked in the pursuit of past nuclear reactor projects.
“I think there is a bit of a sea change that I’ve seen in the last few years about the way many of these companies are addressing this and the way the government is supporting them,” said Ford. “There is a focus at the government level through the Department of Energy to examine how to do this better, looking at consent-based siting mechanisms to look at helping industry engage better with the communities.”
“I think there’s a call for humility here on the part of people like us, analysts, people in government,” said Abdulla. “I think there’s a call for co-producing the future with the community. It’s a much slower, but I argue, much … more sustainable pathway in the long run.”
Joshua Blatt is a media officer at the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The article was originally published on the website of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
