As pools of radioactive water leak from Japan's crippled Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant, some are suggesting that the world should stem the tide in favor of nuclear energy over the last few years. That would be a tragic mistake. Nuclear power, like all other forms of energy generation, has its share of risks. But if the world can manage them, nuclear power can contribute significantly to providing access to the billions that still lack it, satiating soaring energy demands and mitigating the threat of climate change.
The case for nuclear power is strong relative to conventional fossil fuels and other renewables. It generates a lot of energy with a small amount of fuel, has a low carbon footprint, produces less waste and is less prone to accidents or failure. It is thus a fairly attractive option in an energy-thirsty world confronting climate change and high fossil fuel prices. According to the World Nuclear Association, Asia is the main region where nuclear power is growing significantly, with 112 reactors in operation, 37 under construction and a further 84 planned.
Yet no single energy source is a silver bullet. Nuclear power also carries with it several safety, disposal and proliferation risks. In terms of safety, while reactors are designed with layers of redundant safety systems to avert catastrophic failure, there is always some chance that a single event could disable all backup systems at once. This is what appears to have happened in Japan. The combination of an earthquake and tsunami disrupted the electricity supply and diesel generators that were supposed to cool the plants to prevent core melting.
As the dust settles from Fukushima, countries around the world have announced either temporary suspensions on new plants or safety reviews and checks on existing ones. This is a necessary step. Public confidence must be restored in order for these projects to go forward.
But this does not mean that all planned nuclear projects should be suspended or phased out. Instead, countries need to work together to mitigate the risks from nuclear power in order to realize its full benefits. In terms of nuclear waste, countries could follow Japan, which recycles its nuclear fuel and temporarily stores high-level waste in storage sites until more permanent solutions can be found. Proliferation risks can be minimized by ensuring that newcomers to civilian nuclear power abide by international safeguards and are equipped with the regulatory and institutional capacity to absorb and manage nuclear technologies. And both safety standards and cost effectiveness tend to improve over time with new reactor designs and types.
Confronting these risks is no cakewalk. France, the global leader in nuclear power, continues to face problems with waste management and the high costs of its reactor design. Southeast Asian countries contemplating nuclear power face significant political opposition to nuclear energy individually and a lack of legally binding or enforceable rules and treaties collectively. And in authoritarian countries like China, the situation is compounded by a lack of accountability, transparency and public debate, all of which help build trust in nuclear power.
A diverse portfolio of energy sources is needed to slake the world's growing thirst for energy and avert the potentially catastrophic consequences of climate change. Although nuclear power is often associated with images of death, disease and destruction, these fears mask the clear advantages it offers as an energy source today relative to the alternatives. The Fukushima incident ought to compel the world to confront and manage the risks of nuclear energy, rather than turn its back on it. Because, as it stands, nuclear power is still worth the risk.
