Thomas Malthus, an Essay on the Principle of Population and a Summary View of the Principle of Population (London: Penguin, 1970), 205.
Chris Nelder; 'The End of Fossil Fuel'; Forbes; 27th July 2009. See details at :
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Nuclear-Fuel-Cycle/Introduction/Energy-for-the-World---WhyUranium-/ (accessed on 23.4.15)
ibid
http://www.energydigital.com/greentech/1743/Nuclear-Power:-A-clean-energy-source (accessed on 24.4.15)
ibid
Supra 7
http://world-nuclear.org/info/Energy-and-Environment/Environment-and-Health-in-ElectricityGeneration/#_ftnref2 (accessed on 27.4.15)
NAME: Ms. Raagya P. Zadu
Qualification: B.s.l. ll.b, ll.m
Designation: Legal consultant
Relevant discipline: Environmental Laws, energy laws
Year of study: LL.M from Hidayatullah natioal law university, batch of 2015
Address: 21, new road, dehradun-248001. uttrakhand
Email i.d:
[email protected]
CONTACT NUMBER: +91 8392816954
ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF NUCLEAR POWER
Introduction:
"We spend more time developing means of escaping our troubles than we do solving the troubles we're trying to escape from." This statement given a decade ago by David Lloyd George, a British Statesman stands valid even today. This century saw some of the most successful breakthrough achievements in the field of technology, modernization and development. However, it also witnessed some of the most shocking natural phenomenon as well. For most climate experts and environmental scientists, the El Nino effect this year was the strongest as ever before. Global warming broke all existing records with prolonged summers and warmer winters. The polar ice sheet is melting rapidly and the level of the sea is continuing to rise at an alarming rate. If it is to be understood in layman's language, the atmosphere of this Earth is heating up rapidly and if certain counter measures are not taken, it would be disastrous for the existing ecosystems. During the Stockholm Conference when the leaders of the world got together, they brought forth the concept of a development which would be sustainable in nature and would not jeopardize our responsibility towards the environment. Towards the Rio Summit, the focus shifted on to two new human rights which were gradually becoming basic human rights. One is the basic human right of development and the other is the basic human right to a clean and healthy environment. Both these rights have been considered to be of utmost importance for each and every human being for leading a comfortable and dignified life. This however does not in any manner means that the fundamental approach to achieving Sustainable Development would be completely anthropocentric or completely eco-centric. The agenda is to create a balance in between development and maintaining the sanctity of the environment. However, it is important to also take into consideration the ill-effects of technological advancement upon the environment. Majority of the environmental degradation, mostly carbon pollution leading to catastrophic global warming is due to the power industry. The energy generation industry is most critical for the growth and progress of any country or nation. To support the million and billions of people and to ensure that the infrastructure of the country runs smoothly, it is expedient to make sure that there is enough energy to power the same. The post-industrial era period caused the maximum damage to the atmosphere as that was the time when giga tons of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases were released into the atmosphere by thermal plants, industries and factories and simultaneously, the forest cover was depleted to make way for more construction and infrastructure. The damaged caused then, was unprecedented and till date, we as well as our planet are suffering the consequences. In wake of such catastrophe, it becomes important to understand the problem and find a solution which restores the balance in between mindless development and mindful development. Having a completely anthropocentric or a completely eco-centric approach would not be viable in today's times. With development being both, need of the hour and a basic human right, ignoring it completely would deny many countries of what is rightfully theirs.
Apart from the general sources of energy generation, namely the conventional and the non-conventional sources, another source called the New-Energy Source comes into light. Nuclear energy is one such source. Since time immemorial, nuclear energy has been used and perceive as a huge threat and a bane for human environment owing to its use for making weapons of mass destruction. The damage which was caused by the nuclear explosion in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan still haunts the memories of every human being in this world. Past few decades, this source of energy is being put to use for peaceful purposes such as generation of electricity, fueling outer-space missions, submarines and ships, apart from various other non-military activities. The main focus of this paper however, remains to be considering the environmental aspects of nuclear power. This source of power generation has been around since 1951 when the Experimental Breeder Reactor I (EBR-I) in Idaho produced enough electricity to illuminate four 200-watt light bulbs. Since then, many countries have conducted extensive research and development and have been able to use nuclear energy as an efficient means of electricity generation. Nuclear energy is highly efficient as it emits almost negligible amounts of carbon and has an equivalent to a negative carbon footprint on the atmosphere and also produces enormous amounts of energy in minimal fuel requirements and this energy can be harnessed for longer periods of time, thus guaranteeing Energy Security. Environmentalists however, take the apprehensive approach towards this form of power generation as nuclear energy has been long misused for weapons proliferation and if the civil nuclear facilities are not managed and controlled extensively, there is risk of spillage and nuclear accidents are catastrophic for the environment as well as for human life. Safe disposal of nuclear waste is also very important as the nuclides have very long after-lives and they don't decay for a hundred years. Safe handing and management of the entire nuclear cycle right from its mining to power generation and disposal of waste forms a very important aspect for consideration of its effect on to the environment.
Nuclear Power; the paradigm shift
Nuclear Energy has a poor public image for the reason that not many people understand the concept of nuclear energy. Due to the use of nuclear energy in the making of weapons of mass destruction, the people across the world have made a perception that this technology can only be the root cause of destruction and not of any other constructive purpose. This apprehension has been the root cause for this technology to not have gained the trust of the people and development of this technology on a wide scale has been on the back-foot. Depleting natural resources like coal, natural gas, oil and petroleum give rise to a mounting problem which would be encountered by the future generations, as our present use is such, that these reserves would not last post 2050-2100. According to the International Energy Agency (I.E.A.) 1999 projections, natural gas and coal accounted for almost 85 per cent of the world energy production. It is matter of self-realization that with the growing population and with the incessant hoard for development, till date, this consumption rate would have gone up how many folds. Although simplistic on the surface, this question is not easy to address. For starters, there are wide variations when it comes to estimating the world wide natural gas, petroleum and coal reserves. In conventional environmental analysis the issue of a shortage or depletion of natural resources has often been seen through a Malthusian lens as principally a problem of overpopulation. Thomas Malthus raised the issue in the late eighteenth century of what he saw as inevitable shortages of food in relation to population growth. This was later transformed by twentieth-century environmental theorists into an argument that current or future shortages of natural resources resulted from a population explosion overshooting the carrying capacity of the earth. By the end of this century, nearly all of the economically recoverable fossil fuels will be gone. From now until then, what remains will be rationed by price. There will be shortages. Renewable energy–solar, wind, geothermal–currently makes up less than 2% of the world's primary energy supply, and although growing very rapidly, it is not on course to fill the fossil fuel gap, either. As fossil fuels peak and then decline, the world's economies will be forced for the first time to live within a shrinking, not expanding, energy budget. They will adapt to this new reality by repeating the cycle we saw over the last 18 months: commodity price spikes, leading to economic destruction, leading to supply destruction, leading back to price spikes.
Thermal Power Plants require millions of tons of coal every day in order to produce a relatively less amount of electricity. It is estimated that burning thousands of tons of high-grade coal produces a relatively less worth of energy and creates large amount of wastes, both liquid and gaseous in the process which are polluting the environment. Thermal Power Plants are majorly responsible for the emission of carbon dioxide, sulphur dioxide, nitrous oxide and other greenhouse gases along with fly ash which cause air pollution, greenhouse effect and acid rain. These power plants also create sludge or slurry which is soluble in water and clogs, poisons and contaminated the ground water table and surface water bodies. Apart from the harmful emissions and effluents, dependency of coal fired thermal plants across the world and their indiscriminate use of this natural resource is going to be the cause of a global coal crisis which would mean that very soon by 2050, this natural reserve along with petroleum will finish and generation of electricity would be a challenge. The geologists and scientists therefore predict that there must be a paradigm shift in the consumption of natural resources and that the development must be sustainable with the environment. Non-judicious use of natural resources shall end with a possible end to mankind. Consideration of these possible consequences and scenarios it is necessary to point in a direction which talks about the development of one such source of energy production which is sustainable, reliable, feasible and non-polluting. Renewable sources of energy like Hydro-electricity, solar/photovoltaic electricity, geo-thermal electricity, tidal and wind energy are developed technologies and are being incorporated across the world in small segments. However, it is only hydro-electricity which has been able to develop as a reliable and a sustainable source of electricity after thermal energy. It is because channeling the energy of the water body like rivers has been comparatively simpler and is clean energy as it does not generate any kind of emission or effluent. It however does not solve the crisis as the hydro-power plants still do not generate that amount of electricity as would be required to fulfill the demands of a developing country, leave alone a developed nation. Therefore, it forces the mind of the researcher to come to a conclusion that it is nuclear energy which can be relied upon as a source of clean, sustainable and a powerful source of electricity generation. World resources of coal are, in theory, large enough to produce the electricity we shall need for more than a hundred years. There are also environmental and other problems associated with the increased mining and burning of coal. The difference in the heat value of uranium compared with coal and other fuels is important (though both are used at about 33% thermal efficiency in the power station). A one million kilowatt (1,000 MWe) coal-fired power station consumes about 3.2 million tons of black coal each year, and its nuclear counterpart consumes about 24 tons of uranium enriched to about 4% of the useful isotope (U-235). One kilogram of Uranium produces as much energy as 1500 kilo grams of high grade coal. This requires the mining of over 200 tons of natural uranium which may be recovered from, say, over 20,000 tons of typical uranium ore. The Uranium Ore is present in the earth's crust in abundance. It is found in the rocks as well as in sea-water. Due to the minimal and very small amounts of uranium needed to produce a huge amount of energy, it is estimated by various Nuclear Energy Agencies that the present reserves of Uranium will last for the next 200-250 years.
Nuclear energy is a clean, safe, reliable and competitive energy source. It is the only source of energy that can replace a significant part of the fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas) which massively pollute the atmosphere and contribute to the greenhouse effect. An intelligent combination of energy conservation, and renewable energies for local low intensity applications, and nuclear energy for base-load electricity production, is the only viable way for the future. Tomorrow's nuclear electric power plants will also provide power for electric vehicles for cleaner transportation. With the new high temperature reactors we will be able to recover fresh water from the sea and support hydrogen production. Nuclear energy produces almost no carbon dioxide, and no sulfur dioxide or nitrogen oxides whatsoever. These gases are produced in vast quantities when fossil fuels are burned. One gram of uranium yields about as much energy as a ton of coal or oil - it is the famous "factor of a million". Nuclear waste is correspondingly about a million times smaller than fossil fuel waste, and it is totally confined. Nuclear waste is to be deposited in deep geological storage sites; it does not enter the biosphere. Its impact on the ecosystems is minimal. Nuclear waste spontaneously decays over time while stable chemical waste, such as arsenic or mercury, lasts forever. Most fossil fuel waste is in the form of gas that goes up the smokestack. We don't see it, but it is not without effect, causing global warming, acid rain, smog and other atmospheric pollution. The nuclear power industry is now viewed as perhaps the cleanest of all energy technologies. Nuclear power plants emit absolutely no carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides or sulphur dioxides. The Nuclear Energy Institute (N.E.I) stated in a 2009 report, "In 2008, U.S. nuclear plants prevented the emissions of almost 689 million metric tons of carbon dioxide. This is nearly as much carbon dioxide as is released from all U.S. passenger cars." According to the World Nuclear Association (W.N.A) "For every 22 tons of uranium used, one million tons of CO2 emissions is averted." In addition to providing clean air benefits, nuclear power is also viewed as a more reliable energy source. Nuclear power plants utilize very little fuel and therefore are less susceptible to shortages; plus international relations can't affect the fuel supply because the plants use uranium which is plentiful throughout the world. While safety is always a concern when it comes to nuclear power, the precautions now required are rigorous enough to actually prevent disasters from occurring in the first place—making nuclear power one of the safest ways to produce energy today. The industry has learned from previous errors made, and nowadays safety procedures in place minimize the chance of mishaps, like a reactor accident or human exposure to radiation. When it comes to the topic of nuclear waste, the W.N.A claims , "In all countries using nuclear energy there are well established procedures for storing, managing and transporting such wastes, funded from electricity users. Wastes are contained and managed, not released. Storage is safe and secure; plans are well in hand for eventual disposal." Several countries have been successfully utilizing nuclear power for years, and more countries make plans to develop more nuclear power plants. There are currently around 436 commercial nuclear power reactors operating in 30 countries around the world. The W.N.A. states, "More reactors are being built, and over 200 more are planned or firmly proposed." For example, France generates 75 percent of the country's electricity from nuclear power, and has had a longstanding policy for nuclear energy, Belgium generates 60 percent, Sweden generates 50 per cent, and Canada generates 75 per cent of its electricity from nuclear and hydro power. In a recent estimate by the W.N.A, it was projected that one household in a developed country would consume 3500 MWe of electricity annually which could be provided through 890 kilo grams of oil based power, 1100 kilo grams of coal, 100 cubic foot of natural gas or just 7 grams of uranium. To consider the fact, what is clean energy, the answer is very simple. Any energy which is generated with minimal adverse effect and impact to the environment. Not only the generation, but also the procurement of that energy must have minimal adverse effects to the core of the Earth. Over the years, due to various anthropogenic reasons, the self-sustainability of the Earth has suffered a massive blow. It is now necessary that such energy generation techniques are promoted and developed at a large scale which does not stress the natural resources of the earth. Nuclear Energy proves to be one such source which is producing enough energy and its development is feasible without major hindrances. Nuclear Energy is definitely the answer to the world's crisis regarding fossil fuels and global warming. It is a technology which if harnessed and developed on a large scale would prove to be the most beneficial power source as compared to all its counterparts. Apart from being a clean source of energy, nuclear energy will also have a positive economic effect to global markets.
Aspects of Nuclear Power; A Critique
As the environmental consequences of any energy source are inherent in their production, it becomes imperative that we weigh the scale of environmental harm compared to the net useful energy output of the source itself. In a cost-benefit analysis of energy alternatives, nuclear energy stands well apart with regard to environmental, as well as economic impact. It is the cleanest base-load power, accounting for nearly 70 percent of all clean energy produced in the U.S., producing virtually zero greenhouse gas emissions. There are various factors which will emerge as the immediate effects once Nuclear Power is given prominence, and such factors are briefly stated in the following points:
Negligible Carbon Footprint: Nuclear Energy's carbon footprint per kilowatt hour is the smallest among all energy sources. The biggest advantage of harnessing nuclear energy is that this source of energy generation does not involve the release of carbon or any other greenhouse gas. Worldwide emissions of CO2 from burning fossil fuels total about 28 billion tons per year. About 38% of this is from coal and about 43% from oil. Every 1000 MWe power station running on black coal produces CO2 emissions of about 7 million tons per year. If brown coal is used, the amount is about 9 million tons. Nuclear fission does not produce CO2, while emissions from other parts of the fuel cycle (e.g. uranium mining and enrichment) amount to about 2% of those from using coal, and some audited figures show considerably less than this. Every 22 tons of uranium saves about one million tons of CO2 relative to coal. It is now left for one's own understanding that completely eradicating the carbon emissions is not feasible or possible, but adopting methods and technologies which result in minimal emissions is possible. Using nuclear energy has two main benefits; one being that it does not emit any carbon in the atmosphere thus bringing down the carbon levels considerably, and second that it results in the less consumption of the earth's natural reserves of fossil fuels like coal, natural gas and oil and thus causing less stress on the earth's holding capacity.
Energy Efficiency and Security: The first major economic benefit of using and developing nuclear energy is that this technology ensures energy security. Firstly, the world has large reserves of Uranium and Thorium which when used in the various breeder reactors, they contain vast amount of energy through its unique properties and the nuclear reactors are able to generate a comparatively very high amount of energy from a small quantity of fuel. This particular aspect ensures that this source of energy will not run out in the next 200-250 years. Nuclear Energy is very reliable in the sense that the reactors are capable of producing electricity throughout the year without any externalities. Like for instance, in the case of solar energy, For instance, solar-sourced electricity requires collecting energy at a peak density of about 1 kilowatt (kW) per square meter when the sun is shining to satisfy a quite different kind of electricity demand – one which mostly requires a relatively continuous supply. This renewable source of energy though useful, its major drawback would be that during the times of an overcast weather, the solar power cells would not produce electricity. Similarly while the rapid expansion of wind turbines in many countries has been welcome, capacity is seldom more than 30% utilized over the course of a week or year, which testifies to the unreliability of the source and the fact that it does not and cannot match the pattern of demand. Wind is intermittent, and when it does not blow, back-up capacity such as hydro or gas is needed. When it does blow, and displaces power from other sources, it reduces the economic viability of those sources and hence increases prices.
Cost-Benefit Analysis: The Cost-Benefit Analysis (C.B.A.) of any project is done in order to determine whether the respective project is giving any positive result in comparison to the costs which are incurred on its development. In the case of Nuclear Power Plants, the initial costs of setting up the power plant is high, but once the reactor has reached its maximum capacity, the costs thereafter start going down and in the process reduce the cost of electricity, thus being beneficial for the industry. In India, according to rough estimates given by the Environment Impact Assessment branch of the Ministry of Environment and Forests (M.o.E.F.) the recent two major Multi-Purpose River Valley Projects, namely, the Sardar Sarovar Project and the Tehri Dam, the costs incurred in setting them up reached and crossed the $600 billion mark, whereas the functional and equipped Kundankulam Nuclear Power Plant in Tamil Nadu had incurred a total cost of $50 billion. A layman calculation proves that the difference in the costs is huge. Once setup to full capacity, the nuclear power plant does not have any additional costs and the benefits arising from the electricity thus produced is greater. This was one aspect. Another angle to this is, critics point at the fact that nuclear waste management is a very expensive process. However, it would be significant to highlight at this point that nuclear waste which is generated is million times smaller in quantity as compared to the waste generated in the thermal power plants and nuclear waste is securely and necessarily contained at all times. Also, the fuel which is generated from the Uranium enriched reactors is recycled using advanced technology and is reused to feed the smaller reactors which use the spent fuel to generate more electricity. In India, scientists at Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai have developed an experimental reactor which creates a MOX fuel which is the mixture of uranium enriched spent fuel and thorium and used this MOX fuel to feed the Thorium Fuel Reactor which is successfully generating electricity. This technology however has not been commercialized yet, but the scientists are positive that by the year 2020, India would have indigenously developed this technology which would prove to be a breakthrough achievement. To look at successful examples, countries like USA, France, Sweden, Belgium, and Russian Federation have technology to successfully recycle and reuse nuclear waste.
To be fair, it is always just and reasonable to address the advantages and disadvantages of this energy source to be able to correctly form a critique of the aspect of Nuclear Power. Environmentalists and conservationists have been apprehensive of Nuclear Power for the reason that the waste it produces, however minimal, is highly toxic and if let out into the biosphere, can contaminate every living tissue for decades and generations to come. This risk is multiplied by the fact that in a developing country like India, ensuring safe Nuclear Waste Disposal is very difficult, keeping in mind the hasty and faulty Environmental Clearances which are given without much expertise being involved. Secondly, one cannot completely rule out the possibility of an accident in the civil nuclear facility due to natural or man-made reasons. Nuclear Accidents, like the recent one in Fukushima-Diiachi Plant in Japan can prove to be very dangerous and in India, the containment of the complexities of a Nuclear Accident cannot be completely trusted as there are insufficient funds and lack of trained staff working for containment of radiation and damage control purposes in the civil nuclear facilities. Apart from these two main issues which form a cloud on the success of Nuclear Power in India, there does not seem to be any other reason why this aspect of Power Generation would not be considered as environmentally and economically feasible and sustainable.
Conclusion:
Every form of energy generation method is shrouded with some advantage and some disadvantages. For instance, wind energy which has its disadvantage as being land area which is required to setup a wind energy farm and a certain speed of wind to drive the windmills enough to generate electricity. In the case of solar energy, the issue of establishing a vast surface area farm to tap solar power is an issue and so is the fact that during the days there is no sun due to climatic changes, there would be no generation of electricity. It is due to these factors, which raises the cost of generation of electricity, results in these energy sources being more expensive than the use of energy generated through the combustion of fossil fuels. Other sources like hydropower, geothermal, tidal energy etc. too have their share of disadvantages, but they do not cease to be renewable sources of energy which must be developed for mitigating environmental stress. Therefore, to sum up, in order to understand the Environmental Aspects of Nuclear Power, one must approach this issue with a broad understanding of the term 'Environment' and its evolving meaning in the coming times, which not only includes the flora and fauna, but also the anthropocentric environment which keeps the Human Being in the center of the developmental cycle.
