Should the UK Stop Using Nuclear Power?

Written by Classical Liberal 

Recent press reports suggest that the UK government has second thoughts about a tie-up with China to produce a new generation of nuclear power stations in the UK. Is it time for us to have second thoughts about nuclear power in general?

In 2020, nuclear power generated 20% of the UK’s electricity. The UK has thirteen operational nuclear reactors at six locations: twelve advance gas-cooled reactors (AGR) and one pressurised water reactor (PWR). Plus, nuclear reprocessing plants at Sellafield and the Tails Management Facility (TMF) at Capenhurst. The UK established the world’s first civil nuclear programme: opening a nuclear power station, Calder Hall at Windscale, in 1956. At the peak in 1997, 26% of the UK’s electricity was generated from nuclear power. Since then, several reactors have closed, and by 2012 the share had decreased to 19%. The older AGR reactors have been life-extended, and further life extensions across the AGR fleet are likely.

The arguments for and against nuclear power are both strong.

The main arguments against nuclear power are: that it’s unsafe and expensive, renewable sources of energy are ready to replace it, and civilian nuclear power programmes should be discouraged as they can be used to produce nuclear weapons.

Firstly, nuclear power is unsafe and expensive. The 2011 Fukushima disaster showed the world that nuclear power is fundamentally unsafe. The meltdown at Fukushima was the worst since Chernobyl in Ukraine, twenty-five years earlier. Thankfully, the UK has not experienced a disaster like Fukushima or Chernobyl. But safety concerns have been raised over nuclear power plants in the UK. The best-known example, on 19 April 2005, twenty tonnes of Uranium and 160 KG of Plutonium leaked from a cracked pipe at the Thorp nuclear fuel reprocessing plant, at Sellafield, into a secondary containment vessel. Thankfully, there were no fatalities. But the clean-up operation cost $65,000,000. In June 2021, EDF announced that Dungeness B would immediately move into the defueling phase, citing ‘station-specific risks within some components, including parts within the fuel assemblies’, identified since September 2018. Nuclear plants are also expensive to set up and decommission, and the costs of storing radioactive waste (effectively indefinitely) also have to be considered. If the money pumped into nuclear had been spent on renewables, the pay-off would have been greater.

Secondly, renewables are ready to take over from nuclear. We could be producing 100% of our energy from renewables by 2050. The technology is already prepared for the market. Furthermore, if we don’t start using renewables now, then we may never make the switch.

Thirdly, we want to live in a world free of nuclear weapons. Iran is developing a civilian nuclear programme that analysts warn could be used for a covert nuclear weapons capability. Iran says it needs nuclear power to guarantee its energy security. And the West’s diplomatic efforts to convince Iran otherwise would be much easier if it could be demonstrated that civilian nuclear energy was unnecessary. If the West wants a nuclear-free world, then it has to commit to abandoning nuclear technology altogether.

The main arguments for nuclear power are: that modern technology is safe, nuclear power does not contribute to climate change as much as coal or gas, and nuclear fission is more efficient than most renewable energy sources.

Firstly, modern nuclear technology is safe, and it’s getting safer. Fukushima was an old plant, and the latest generation of nuclear-reactor designs are much less likely to melt down. In addition, earthquakes and tsunamis of the magnitude that caused the Fukushima disaster are unheard of in the UK.

Secondly, we need to use all of the energy sources we have because renewables cannot yet take over from nuclear power. The alternatives to nuclear are coal and natural gas – including unconventional gas resources – and over the long-term, these are much more polluting and damaging to the environment than nuclear. Nuclear power plants produce very low to zero amounts of direct greenhouse gas emissions. Indeed, in June 2020, Zion Lights, a spokesperson for Extinction Rebellion UK, declared her support for nuclear energy as a critical part of the energy mix along with renewable energy sources. She called fellow environmentalists to accept that nuclear power is part of the ‘scientifically assessed solutions for addressing climate change’.

Thirdly, nuclear power is efficient. Generating energy using nuclear fission requires significantly less fuel (Uranium) than the comparable amount that coal or gas plants need to produce the equivalent level of power. Tonnes of fuel compared to thousands of tonnes of fuel. Nuclear power is also highly reliable compared to renewable sources of energy. In the USA, for example, nuclear generators typically operated at over 90% capacity over the past decade. Nuclear power compares very favourably with wind power, which has not topped 44%. Nuclear power is also consistently more efficient than hydropower or solar. And, nuclear fusion is a valuable area of research that could potentially guarantee abundant clean energy and eventually solve all of our energy needs. Thus, it’s worth investing in the technology, continuing to use it, and not abandoning it.

What do you think? Should the UK stop using nuclear power?