Nuclear reactor reaction
The more Australians discuss and learn about nuclear energy, the more public opinion is swaying in favour of it as an alternative energy source.
WHY SHOULD AUSTRALIA CONSIDER NUCLEAR POWER?
Proponents say nuclear power is reliable, and safer and cheaper than it once was.
But because it also produces little in the way of greenhouse gases — the nasties that cause climate change and global warming – it has also been proposed as a solution for countries that need to slash their emissions.
Bill Gates and Boris Johnson are among its high-profile champions. Analysis by Professor Manfred Lenzen, from the University of Sydney, found nuclear power has 65 grams of CO2 per kilowatt hour of power, roughly equivalent to wind power. By comparison, coal had 900g of CO2 emissions per kilowatt hour, and gas had 450g.
Most Australians get their information on nuclear power from The Simpsons
SO WHAT’S STOPPING US?
Legislation. Australia has about one third of the world’s uranium, but a 1998 act of federal al parliament banned hurdle. Surveys of the the development evelopment of nuclear Australian public have power r here. Critics say this traditionally shown low levels makes s Australia an outlier, of support for nuclear power, compared ared to other countries but there are signs this is with high electricity usage. changing.
CANN WE CHANGE
A Lowy Institute
Poll released in May
THEE BAN?
found 47 per cent
Public c opinion is the first of Australians were now in favour of revoking the ban – a significant step up from previous years.
The more people understand nuclear power, the less they fear it, and the more they support it, said Dr Joanne Lackenby, president of the Australian Nuclear Association (ANA).
“Most Australians get their information on nuclear power from The Simpsons,” she said. “It’s It a fantastic show, but not very ver accurate when it comes to nuclear n technology.”
WAIT W — ISN’T NUCLEAR NU POWER UNSAFE? UN
According Acc to studies assessed by Our World In Data, nuclear power pow is far safer than fossil fuel, fue resulting in 99 per cent fewer few deaths overall than coal and oil, and 97.5 per cent fewer few deaths than gas.
Of O course, two catastrophes cat loom large in any discussion of nuclear
power: pow the 1986 reactor explosion exp in Chernobyl , Ukraine, Uk and the 2011 meltdowns me at Fukushima, Japan, Jap after the region was hit by an earthquake and tsunami. tsu
The T World Health Organisation Org estimates 4000 people peo have or will die as a result of the Chernobyl disaster, while the human death toll from Fukushima stands at just one.
The Chernobyl and
Fukushima plants were from “the VCR era” of plant design, Dr Lackenby said. said “What’s being constructed today is a step up from that,” she said, citing new reactors in China, which have been designed to avoid a Fukushima-style calamity through the concept of ‘passive safety’.
“There’s no requirement for anybody to do anything [in the event of an emergency] for three days,” Dr Lackenby said.
“In that case you have three days to get hold of diesel generators to get your power up and running again.
“And what’s planned for the future, small module reactors and other advanced reactors, are a step up again.”
WHAT ARE SMALL MODULE REACTORS?
Smaller in scale, cheaper and quicker to build, easier to fit into our existing grid, and producing less radioactive waste, small module reactors have been proposed as a more palatable
form of nuclear power for Australia.
The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation has suggested small module reactors could be a useful component of Australia’s energy mix if paired with energy-intensive industrial sites such as aluminium smelters.
Dr Lackenby said small module reactors also ameliorated concerns about safety.
“When you have a smaller reactor, you have a smaller core, which means you have more opportunity to use the passive safety techniques that the bigger reactors are now using,” she said.
“There’s one particular design that’s almost been licensed in the US, where the emergency zone for the reactor, should anything go wrong, is the site boundary.
So if you live right next door, you’d be totally fine from a radiation safety perspective.”
WHAT ABOUT NUCLEAR WASTE?
Australia currently has no disposal facility for high-level nuclear waste, the most radioactive stuff which constitutes about 3 per cent of the volume of total waste produced by nuclear power.
A site on South Australia’s Eyre Peninsula has been selected as a permanent repository for low-level waste, and temporary storage of intermediate-level waste.
But a new solution for the disposal of the high-level stuff would need to be found if Australia was to pursue nuclear power. an overseas facility; build a facility here in Australia (Bob Hawke long championed the idea that Australia could become a world leader in the safe storage of high-level waste, given our geological stability); or recycle it.
“When it comes to recycling there’s a lot of work going into how we can recycle all the useful materials,” Dr Lackenby said.
“Once [nuclear fuel has] been used it still contains about 95 per cent of its energy, so it’s like buying a beer, having a sip and then chucking the rest away.
“If we can get the chemistry right for full recycling, we can reduce the lifetime of the waste to the same level as low level waste, and just keep reusing the products.”
This, she said, was the “ultimate dream” because it “closes the fuel cycle”.