The arguments in favor of nuclear power are strong. We need plentiful low-cost, carbon-free energy to power our society and combat global warming. A shift to nuclear energy would tilt geopolitical power structures away from oil-producing nations and allow us to more easily address human rights abuses in countries like Saudi Arabia. Nuclear power is young yet established technology, allowing for increases in safety and efficiency without the initial learning curve that we’ve already cleared. It is energy-dense. It is cheap.
But let me set aside all of these compelling environmental and economic arguments, and take up another: Nuclear power would reduce energy-related fatalities, both in regular production and in the case of disasters. The human side is important. It’s safer for all of us if we transition to nuclear energy.
First, let’s consider accidents. Every year, numerous coal miners in the U.S. die from industrial accidents (15 in 2017) or medical issues related to breathing in coal dust. It’s a dangerous industry — in 2016, 116 coal miners died from black lung disease. Of course, these accidents affect workers, and generally do not happen all at once. In contrast, accidents involving nuclear power are often much larger. The total meltdown of three reactors at the nuclear power station in Fukushima, Japan following an earthquake and tsunami in 2011 was one of the worst disasters in the history of nuclear power. The tsunami killed 19,000 people, and the meltdown shocked the world — yet only one man died from radiation exposure.
Of course, disaster is only one of the fears surrounding nuclear energy. Another is the residual effects of nuclear waste. Plutonium-239 has a half-life of about 24,100 years, and naturally people worry about where spent fuel rods and coolant should be stored. The worry is that it could leech into the earth, poisoning our water supply, food and living environments. Stored safely, of course, this could and should be avoided. But let’s look at the other side of the equation for a moment: What is happening to the waste we already produce? Horizontal oil drilling and fracking today produce naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM), which is incredibly hazardous to the environment and civilian populations. Before oil companies acknowledged the risks NORM poses to the public, it was often recycled into steel products like awnings, plumbing fixtures and fencing. Hazardous radioactive material already poses a continuing danger to the public. Furthermore, particulate matter in the air — a byproduct of burning fossil fuels for energy — has caused deadly air pollution in many cities around the world. At least with nuclear waste, we won’t be reckless enough to intentionally build water pipes out of it, and the steam released by cooling towers won’t damage our lungs.
Simply in terms of human costs and continued risk to the public, nuclear energy is a safer option than our current fossil fuel systems. When added to concerns about wildlife, climate change and geopolitical stability, this should be the straw that breaks the camel's back. There shouldn’t be much debate about shifting to nuclear power; it’s the best choice available from every angle.
Pretty Lawns and Gardens: The humanity in energy production
