In recent years, a growing number of voices from the scientific community, environmental activists, and the media have advocated for nuclear energy as a solution to climate change. This perspective, however, is met with resistance from those who oppose nuclear energy due to its associated risks. So, who is right? The answer is complex.
To mitigate the rapid progression of climate change, the world must aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net zero. In 2018, energy production was responsible for 73% of global emissions, primarily due to the burning of fossil fuels. Currently, 84% of the world’s primary energy comes from fossil fuels, with oil, coal, and gas being the major contributors. Only 16% of global energy is derived from low-emission sources, including hydroelectric, solar, wind, bioenergy, and nuclear power.
One of the most effective strategies for reducing reliance on fossil fuels is to electrify as many sectors as possible. Electricity can be generated using low-emission technologies such as solar, wind, and nuclear power. However, the transition is challenging because most electricity worldwide is still produced by burning fossil fuels. Despite the rapid installation of renewable energy sources, the demand for electricity continues to rise, leading to increased fossil fuel consumption.
Nuclear energy, although not renewable, produces significantly fewer greenhouse gas emissions compared to fossil fuels. However, its growth has stagnated over the past two decades. While countries like China, India, and South Korea have expanded their nuclear capabilities, others like Germany and Japan have been decommissioning their nuclear plants. This is puzzling, given that countries with substantial low-carbon electricity, such as France and Sweden, rely heavily on nuclear power.
The primary challenge with nuclear energy is the outdated technology of most reactors, which are costly to replace. In Western countries, building new nuclear reactors is expensive due to a loss of expertise, policy changes, and stringent regulations. In contrast, countries like South Korea, China, India, and Russia can construct new reactors more efficiently and cost-effectively.
Concerns about nuclear waste and potential accidents also contribute to the hesitancy surrounding nuclear energy. However, advancements in small reactors and next-generation technologies that can recycle radioactive waste into new fuel offer promising solutions.
While renewable energy sources are the future of electricity, they face significant challenges, particularly in terms of reliability and consistency. The sun doesn’t always shine, and the wind doesn’t always blow, especially during peak electricity demand times. To ensure a stable energy supply, massive storage capacities are needed to store energy for later use. Until such technologies are widely available, other energy sources must provide a reliable supply.
No single energy source is perfect; each has its unique challenges. Both renewable and nuclear energy require time, investment, and technological innovation. Neither is currently capable of completely replacing fossil fuels on its own. The key question is how we choose to address these challenges.
Should we abandon nuclear energy and accept higher emissions temporarily? Or should we extend the life of existing nuclear reactors while improving renewable technologies? Alternatively, should we invest in new nuclear technologies that are safer and more cost-effective?
Given the risks posed by climate change, it is prudent to pursue any technology that could contribute to a solution. Nuclear and renewable energy should not be seen as adversaries but as partners in the fight against climate change. Both require innovation and investment, and it is wise to invest in both to see which can deliver results more quickly.
If nuclear energy is phased out prematurely, its capacity will likely be replaced by fossil fuels, at least partially. Despite the high costs of new nuclear plants in the West, they may be more economical in the long run if they prevent additional fossil fuel capacity and the associated consequences of climate change.
Ultimately, whether we need nuclear energy depends on how challenging we choose to make the transition away from fossil fuels. In a world struggling to reduce fossil fuel dependence, why make the task harder than necessary?
Form two groups and engage in a debate about the role of nuclear energy in combating climate change. One group will argue in favor of nuclear energy as a necessary solution, while the other will present the risks and challenges associated with it. Use evidence from the article to support your arguments.
Choose one low-emission energy source mentioned in the article (e.g., solar, wind, hydroelectric, bioenergy, or nuclear). Conduct research on its benefits, challenges, and current usage worldwide. Present your findings in a multimedia presentation to the class.
Analyze a case study of a country that has successfully integrated nuclear energy into its energy mix, such as France or Sweden. Discuss the policies, technologies, and societal attitudes that contributed to their success. Share your analysis in a written report.
Participate in a simulation game where you manage a country’s energy transition from fossil fuels to low-emission sources. Make decisions on investments, policy changes, and technology adoption. Reflect on the challenges and trade-offs you encountered during the simulation.
Write a short story or essay imagining a future where nuclear and renewable energy have successfully replaced fossil fuels. Describe the societal, environmental, and technological changes that have occurred. Share your vision with the class.
Nuclear – Relating to the energy released during the splitting or merging of atomic nuclei. – Nuclear power plants generate electricity by using the heat produced from nuclear fission reactions.
Energy – The capacity to do work or produce change, often measured in joules or kilowatt-hours. – Solar panels convert sunlight into electrical energy that can be used to power homes.
Emissions – The act of releasing substances, especially gases, into the atmosphere. – Reducing carbon dioxide emissions is crucial for mitigating the effects of global warming.
Fossil – Relating to fuels formed from the remains of ancient plants and animals, such as coal, oil, and natural gas. – Burning fossil fuels for energy releases greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.
Fuels – Materials that are burned or otherwise consumed to produce energy. – Biofuels are considered a more sustainable alternative to traditional fossil fuels.
Renewable – Referring to energy sources that are naturally replenished, such as solar, wind, and hydroelectric power. – Wind farms are an example of renewable energy sources that can help reduce reliance on fossil fuels.
Climate – The long-term patterns of temperature, humidity, wind, etc., in an area. – Scientists study climate data to understand how global temperatures are changing over time.
Change – The process through which something becomes different, often used in the context of environmental shifts. – Climate change is causing more frequent and severe weather events around the world.
Electricity – A form of energy resulting from the existence of charged particles, used to power devices and infrastructure. – Hydroelectric dams generate electricity by using the flow of water to turn turbines.
Technology – The application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes, especially in industry. – Advances in battery technology are making electric vehicles more efficient and affordable.
