Fanny's fact check: there are proponents and opponents of nuclear energy
From the comic book: 'De Kiekeboes: Uranium-235'
Fanny is right! When it comes to nuclear energy, citizens, politicians, countries and even experts often disagree. It's not entirely black and white.
© In collaboration with De Standaard Uitgeverij. All illustrations and storylines belong to them.
Proponents argue that nuclear energy is essential in the fight against climate change and in ensuring a CO2-neutral society, and they highlight the continuous availability of this energy source, which does not need sun or wind, but above all, the fact it generates energy CO2-free. Opponents believe that nuclear energy is not essential, and they are concerned about nuclear waste and the potential risk of nuclear disasters.
The importance of a good debate
It is not easy to form an opinion about nuclear energy. The arguments put forward by proponents and opponents are often complex and contradictory.
Nuclear energy is not a black and white issue. Before you form your own opinion, it is crucial to carefully find out about all the pros and cons of nuclear energy, as well as the other ways energy can be generated, and to understand exactly what is at stake. Only by putting all the arguments of the various ways energy can be generated, and their interaction, on the table, and when both society and its political representatives are well informed about these arguments, can there be a meaningful debate, and informed and justified decisions about the role of nuclear energy in our energy mix.
Belgium also conducts research into a more sustainable implementation of nuclear energy, and is exploring the possibility of 4th-generation Small Modular Reactors. Cooled by lead, these reactors could form a vital link in a future CO2-neutral energy supply, while assuaging society's concerns. These include less waste and more efficient use of resources, and a commitment to passive safety.
💡 Want to know more about SMRs and why SCK CEN's preference is for the lead-cooled option? Read more here.
SCK CEN Barometer
The SCK CEN barometer, an opinion poll taken every 2 years, surveys the perception of radiation risks, and the Belgian public's questions and opinions about nuclear technologies. Here too, the conclusion is clear: while policy discussions about nuclear energy in Belgium are often in black and white terms, and only come down to whether or not to keep nuclear power plants open, opinion polls show that the public has a broader view of nuclear energy.
📰 Read the most recent report here
The arguments of proponents and opponents
Both proponents and opponents cite well-founded and reasonable arguments. Below we list the most commonly heard arguments in the nuclear energy debate.
What do proponents of nuclear energy put forward?
Less CO2
Nuclear energy is virtually CO2-neutral. In a nuclear power plant, no CO2 is created when electricity is generated. That means that nuclear energy is more climate-friendly than, say, natural gas or coal, and is a sustainable addition to the energy mix and in the transition to it. If we consider the entire life cycle (construction, transport, etc.) of current energy sources, emissions from nuclear energy are similar to those from wind power and lower than those from solar power.
Bron figuur 1: gegevens uit een rapport van 'United Nations Economic Commission for Europe [Lees het volledige rapport hier - enkel beschikbaar in het Engels]
Affordable
The cost (per kWh) of generating electricity in current nuclear power plants is lower than solar and wind power.
Reliable and constant security of supply
Nuclear energy makes energy generation less dependent on external environmental factors such as wind or solar. Electricity generation in nuclear power plants remains constant under all weather conditions and the supply of electricity is therefore assured.
The likelihood of an accident is low
Per unit of energy, nuclear energy is the safest energy source. Although the likelihood of an accident is extremely low, the impact of any accident could be substantial. The nuclear industry therefore adheres to extremely strict safety procedures and is subject to rigorous controls. The nuclear sector is one of the most controlled and best secured sectors in the world for a reason. By extension, the number of deaths per kWh at nuclear power plants is much lower than for many other forms of energy.
Source figure 2: Deaths per TWh energy production – processed by Our World in Data
What do the opponents put forward?
Radioactive waste
Like any human activity, generating electricity in a nuclear power plant produces waste. In this case, radioactive waste, that continues giving off radiation for a very long time. For opponents, there is no acceptable solution for this radioactive waste.
Text figure: Radioactivity diminishes over time, and can vary to a significant extent. This is expressed in half-life, the time in which the radioactivity of a substance falls to half its original value.
Building plants takes a long time and is very expensive
Unlike the energy is supplies, the construction of a nuclear power plant is very expensive. Building a nuclear power plant takes an average of 6 to 10 years, and that can add up. Some of the major construction projects incur delays lasting several years, and costs balloon up to 3 times the original budget. In the very short term, a new power plant cannot contribute to the climate goals.
Accidents can be serious
Although there are very strict safety requirements that must be followed by the nuclear industry, and there are lessons learned from every event, the chance of an accident is never zero. The impact of a nuclear accident can be significant.
Is nuclear energy dangerous?
Fanny's question, "Is nuclear energy dangerous?" is difficult to answer just like that. Indeed, nuclear energy is only the process where energy is released during the fission of a heavy atomic nucleus into two lighter atomic nuclei.
Let's answer her question by breaking it down:
- Is a nuclear reactor dangerous?
- Is radioactivity dangerous?
- What about the radioactive waste that is generated, is that dangerous?
Is a nuclear reactor dangerous?
You just read that nuclear energy is the energy released during the fission of a heavy atomic nucleus into two lighter atomic nuclei. This energy is used in a nuclear power plant to produce electricity. That's what the nuclear reactor is used for.
As cited in the arguments of the proponents and opponents above, the likelihood of a nuclear accident is extremely low, but never zero. The whole sector is subject to strict requirements, and rigorous controls are in place both in Belgium and internationally. In Belgium, the Federal Agency for Nuclear Control (FANC) closely monitors all activities in the sector.
Because of the impact we have seen from the nuclear disasters in Fukushima and Chernobyl, there is a perception among many people that nuclear power plants and nuclear reactors are not safe. However, the Belgian reactors are a different, safer version than the reactors at Chernobyl, and compared to those at Fukushima, they have additional protection against unforeseen circumstances and extreme events such as earthquakes or floods.
The designs of the new generation of nuclear reactors also focus on even higher levels of safety.
⚛️ Although SCK CEN does not generate electricity, the research centre does have nuclear reactors. These are reactors that are used for scientific research and producing medical radioisotopes.
Safety and security are also a priority for SCK CEN. A battalion of safety systems, measurements and procedures protect colleagues and installations every day against all possible scenarios.
Is radioactivity dangerous?
When we talk about radioactivity, we mean the natural process by which excess energy in a nucleus is emitted in the form of a particle or radiation.
Radioactivity is a natural phenomenon. Although in high doses it can damage our DNA, it is also incredibly useful in a range of applications. It can even save lives. Radioactivity can therefore be dangerous, but only if you handle it irresponsibly.
💡 How and when radioactivity can be dangerous or how radioactivity can even save your life, you could already read in a previous factcheck.
What about the radioactive waste that is generated, is that dangerous?
Generating electricity at nuclear power plants produces nuclear waste, or "radioactive waste." This includes irradiated nuclear fuel, packaging materials, etc. And there's a big difference between them all. As you can read in the comic, we differentiate between different categories depending on the life span and the level of radioactivity. Each category requires a different approach.
Radioactive waste still presents a risk, as you can read above. And as long as it can pose a danger, we have to shield it from people and the environment. ONDRAF/NIRAS is the national institution responsible for the management of radioactive waste from A to Z.
Safe management is therefore important, but so is avoiding waste. And that is where SCK CEN's expertise comes in. Not everything that has passed through a nuclear power plant has to be radioactive waste. There are ways of recovering the maximum amount of material and limiting the quantity of nuclear waste to a minimum.
Want to know all about radioactive waste? Learn more on low- and intermediate-level short-lived waste in this factcheck. As from 30 April on high-level and/or long-life waste.