In
the 1950s Nuclear Power was believed to offer cheap and abundant energy for the
future but now appears to be dirty, dangerous and expensive. This article
examines the technology and what has caused this change of view.
Nuclear energy is neither a fossil fuel nor renewable resource but utilises natural physical processes, demonstrated destructively by atomic and hydrogen bombs. Atomic power stations (such as Sizewell, pictured left) have met around 20% of British electricity demands. They generate heat using a moderator (e.g. heavy water or graphite) to slow down particles emitted from fuel rods made from mined radioactive minerals (e.g. uranium) enriched to enhance radioactivity. Coolants (MAGNOX, AGR and PWR) produce steam to drive turbines that generate electricity. This replicates fossil fuel (e.g. coal, oil and methane) power stations, which actually work at higher temperatures (1200 compared with 600 degrees C) but emit carbon dioxide and other gases that are linked to climate change and deplete the natural capital available to future generations. However, harnessing atomic energy has created a residue of solid and liquid wastes poisonous to life for thousands of years to come but no satisfactory long-term method of either storage or safe conversion.
Whereas fission (detected as radioactivity) naturally generates heat in the crust below our feet, fusion (e.g. hydrogen atoms combining to form helium and energy) is experienced in the Sun's light and warmth. Despite fifty years expensive research, fusion experiments have not delivered usable energy systems and there are experts who believe it is either impossible or too dangerous to achieve on Earth. Their conclusion is that it is safer, cheaper and more practicable to harness both types of nuclear energy at one step removed by using geothermal heat and solar power, which include photovoltaic and wind energy systems.
![]()
Front Page | Home Page for individuals | Business Services Index | Site contents & internal links | Email the Author