Nuclear power has been a blessing and a curse to mankind since the dawn of the industrial age. Nuclear energy has proved to be incredibly powerful in both peaceful circumstances and also at times of war (like in Hiroshima). In warfare, nuclear weapons cause destruction by splitting an atom of uranium to release unimaginable amounts of energy. In nuclear power plants however, fission is slowed down drastically so that the energy released by the uranium is used to generate heat, which is used to make steam. The steam is then run through turbines to generate electricity. Incredibly, nuclear power has 12 times the power yield of a coal fired or hydro plant; thus a nuclear reactor can be used as the ultimate clean, efficient and cost effective way of powering our future.

One major advantage that nuclear energy has over other conventional power sources is that it has zero carbon emissions and is more cost effective versus other renewable resources. The only output of a nuclear reactor is water vapor, spent uranium, and of course a huge surplus of energy. The waste is more containable due to increased technology of enrichment facilities and depositories. There have been disputes over the use and final destination of spent uranium because of the fear of severe damage to the environment and also a threat of it being extracted for weapons grade plutonium for use in nuclear weapons. Efforts are being made by both the government and private facilities to change the reputation in the eyes of Americans.

Currently, nuclear power supplies the United States with approximately 20 percent of its energy supply and almost all of Eurasia gets its power by nuclear energy. The United States primarily refrains from nuclear energy due to terrorism threats and also the Chernobyl and Three Mile Island plant meltdowns that happened in the late 1970’s to early 80’s. Even though the disasters were not as tragic as they could have been, nuclear power still became blacklisted in the minds of Americans. The media had reported the incidents in such a way that it became a fuel source for antinuclear environmentalists. As a result, the United States is currently having trouble trying to get the nuclear energy program working again.
A major incentive to keep the nuclear program alive is being able to close our dependence on foreign oil. By doing this, the amount of threat coming from the Middle East (Islamic terrorism) could be drastically reduced. Political debates trouble over which is the better tradeoff: have multiple terrorist targets around the country (reactors contain highly valuable and volatile materials that can be taken for profit or for nuclear weapons), or face an energy crisis and an economic dilemma of dependency on foreign oil and national security. The United States also has an economic incentive to refrain from use of nuclear power; with a cheap source of power, it will decrease revenue of lower profile energy sources such as wind, solar, and hydro power. Being as inefficient as they are, our increasing energy demand will require more production of them; the relatively inelastic demand for power will force citizens to use the resources given. The consequences for the consumer, unfortunately, would be rather costly. With a sharper growth of energy demand expected to rise in the coming decade, the issue’s resolution is critical to keeping the United States on its feet.

The nuclear energy program is a popular ideal in most countries except the United States. Europe and some parts of Asia get a majority of their power from nuclear plants. They probably use it without question because they lack the limitations and reputation that lies with the United States. One reason could be that they have such an inelastic demand for power due to their population density, that they have no choice but to take nuclear power into consideration. They even recycle and reprocess their nuclear waste. In the United States however, we do not reprocess nuclear waste. The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) was established to stop the spread of nuclear weapons soon after the Three Mile Island plant meltdown. Since U-235 can be extracted from nuclear waste and be used for weapons, a law was passed to not reprocess waste in an effort to set an example for other countries to promote non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. This law, in turn, made circumstances much worse for the reputation of nuclear energy, because the last destination for nuclear waste would be inside a repository such as Yucca Mountain. Many environmentalists are infuriated by this, thus further making proliferation of nuclear energy even more difficult. The United States also has the reputation of being a terrorist target after the destruction of the World Trade Center. The government has also tightened the reins on security as a result.

While supporting nuclear power development, the government has already made an effort to help the nuclear program by tightening safety regulations on plants in an effort to make them more responsible. Because the accident in the Chernobyl meltdown happened mainly due to human error, nuclear management is putting an even more watchful eye on them. The securities of many plant sites have also been upgraded in an effort to defend them against sabotage and terrorism. Also many reactors with upgraded cooling technologies (gas and liquid primarily) have double walled the reaction chambers to better keep it contained and under control. Even the backup systems and control rods have an even tighter knit routine inspection.

In Chernobyl, 1979, the result of the plant meltdown was a result of poor construction, and an experiment gone wrong. This meltdown was the first serious one of its kind. The meltdown could have well been avoided if the plant operators were not experimenting around with the controls. The engineers tried to perform an experiment to see if it would continue to run in a total power failure (this also includes total shutdown of emergency backup coolant pumps and power supplies). To simulate total power failure, the power supply from the plant to the main grid (also the backup power supply, which is highly unlikely to happen in a real life situation) was deliberately shut down. This stopped the flow of coolant to the reaction chamber, which in turn caused the fuel rods to quickly rise in temperature and become dangerously unstable. Before the engineers had time to react, the fuel rods had melted and made their way to the concrete bottom of the reaction chamber. In a desperate effort to regain control, the operators reactivated the cooling pumps. The reactors were so hot that they had eaten their way through the concrete bottom and into the earth. The water had instantly turned into steam, causing a sudden pressure buildup and the chamber to explode, killing 31 people! A radius of 20 miles had to be evacuated and became uninhabitable. This “avoidable” accident acted as a main fuel for antinuclear environmentalists’ campaigns. The investigation of the meltdown indicated failure primarily due to human error and poor construction.

The Three Mile Island meltdown was caused by a combination of poor procedure and human error. A main coolant valve had gotten stuck in the reaction chamber, resulting in the emergency coolant pumps to activate. The engineers operating the reactor misdiagnosed the problem, thinking instead that it was a malfunction of the emergency pumps kicking in when they were not supposed to. The plant operators had not realized that a meltdown had begun (as a result of the emergency pumps being shutdown). The damage inside the reactor had completely ruined the fuel and control rod apparatuses, but the chamber on the other hand, did not rupture and release fallout, like the Chernobyl meltdown. The bottom of the reactor also stayed intact, indicating it was well constructed. Despite many problems being fixed, another meltdown occurrence was the last straw to environmentalists. The campaign to promote use of nuclear energy was made practically impossible to conduct. The meltdown had occurred in 1979; the technology with respect to plant safety and efficiency has drastically improved since then. The reputation of nuclear power in the United States still remains negative amongst the majority even though the probability of an accident occurring again is almost nothing.

Nuclear reactors designed within the new millennium have undergone many different modifications that have made them stronger and safer than ever before. Despite these modifications, many antinuclear environmentalists have put emphasis on the downsides. The power plants that have failed in the past are greatly obsolete. The Chernobyl disaster (the worst one yet) was caused by poor reactor construction and a critical human error, which has blacklisted nuclear proliferation in a select few. The Three Mile Island disaster had a minor meltdown, but the structure held together and posed no safety risk. However it blacklisted nuclear energy further in the eyes of Americans.

Now a nuclear reactor operates the on the same basic concept that other reactors use to produce electricity: generate heat to make steam and power turbines to get the electricity.
A nuclear reactor is just a very efficient heater. The reactor uses the slow fission of a radioactive material to generate massive amounts of heat. The heat is kept under control by coolant, which keeps the heat of the reaction from accelerating out of control and causing a meltdown. In Chernobyl, the meltdown was so great that it burned right through the concrete floor and into the Earth below. That is why it is vital that the cooling system is functional to keep the reaction in check. All reactors have a backup power and cooling system; the Three Mile Island and Chernobyl meltdowns would not have happened if the backup systems were not deactivated.

There are several different methods of cooling a reaction chamber. The most common of all cooling systems is the light water reactor (LWR). This type uses plain water to cool the reaction chamber by pumping it through the active areas (which contain superheated steam) to help condense it back into water. The evaporated coolant water is dispersed through its enormous smoke stacks. The second type of reactor is the liquid metal reactor (LMR). The cooling system consists of liquid sodium in an enclosed reactor apparatus. Because sodium has an extremely high boiling point, it is capable of absorbing massive heat surges. The only con is it has a high level of reactivity to water and air, so it must be contained at all times. The third type of reactor is a gas cooled reactor (GCR). This type uses helium to cool the reactor core. Since helium is a gas, it always needs to be under pressure. The GCR is quite an efficient method of controlling a nuclear reactor; if a meltdown were to happen, it would slow the process to a matter of days instead of minutes, giving the plant operators plenty of time to diagnose the problem.

Nuclear power is the pinnacle of innovation in most countries with high population. They see it as an incredible clean, efficient, nonpolluting form of energy; and since it is the only method known to produce such a massive amount of energy for its cost, it is indicated to be the most efficient way of satisfying their demand for electricity. The United States have both sides to deal with, both pronuclear and antinuclear environmentalists. Despite numerous efforts to try and take nuclear energy development off of the United States’ blacklist, it will be a matter of time before they have no choice but to keep nuclear power as an option due to our growing demand for energy.