Nuclear Power: Land Pollution And Its Legacy

Nuclear power is a highly contested topic, with many arguing that it pollutes the land and poses a threat to the environment and public health. The extraction of uranium, the fuel for nuclear power plants, through underground or open-pit mining, or chemical processes, has been found to expose workers to high levels of radon gas and increase their risk of lung cancer. Open-pit mining, in particular, destroys ecosystems, leaving behind toxic and radioactive remnants, while in situ leaching contaminates groundwater. The creation of radioactive waste, such as uranium mill tailings and spent reactor fuel, is another major concern, as these materials can remain dangerous for thousands of years. Additionally, nuclear accidents, such as the Fukushima Daiichi meltdown in 2011, have resulted in the abandonment of large areas of land and severe health consequences for surrounding communities. However, others argue that nuclear techniques can be used to study and monitor pollutants, assisting in risk assessments and environmental remediation.

Uranium mining methods and their environmental impact

Uranium is a naturally occurring radioactive element that has been mined and used for its chemical properties for over a thousand years. Uranium mining, processing, and reclamation can cause long-term environmental impacts, including on habitats, hydrological alterations, and adverse changes to water quality. Uranium can be recovered in two main ways: conventional mining of rock (ore) and in situ leaching (ISL) or in situ recovery (ISR).

Conventional Mining

Conventional mining involves digging rock out of open pits when uranium is found near the surface. Open-pit mining strips away the topsoil and rock above the uranium ore. This method creates radioactive waste, and if not managed properly, mining waste and mill tailings can contaminate the environment. Tailings contain all the naturally occurring non-radioactive and radioactive elements found in uranium ore, and while most of the uranium is extracted during processing, the majority of the original radioactivity remains in the mill tailings. The tailings are stored in tailings ponds or containment fields to prevent wind and water erosion.

In Situ Leaching (ISL)

In situ leaching is the process of pumping chemicals into groundwater to dissolve uranium in porous rocks. After the chemicals are put into the ground, the liquid containing uranium is pumped to the surface through a network of wells and then processed to recover the uranium. This method has become the most commonly used uranium extraction method in the United States in recent decades, especially in Texas and Wyoming.

Environmental and Health Impact of Uranium Mining

The extraction process creates radioactive wastes, and the dust that blows away from the sites and the water used for dust control and uranium extraction contain long-lived radioisotopes that contaminate the environment. In the tailings, thorium-230 decays to produce radon gas, which has a half-life of 76,000 years. In the atmosphere, radon decays into radioactive solids that enter water, crops, trees, soil, and animals, including humans. Uranium mining has also been linked to genetic effects in humans, with studies showing increased incidences of Down syndrome and congenital anomalies in populations exposed to higher levels of natural background radiation.

Radioactive waste and its disposal

Nuclear power plants have been associated with the creation of radioactive wastes such as uranium mill tailings, spent (used) reactor fuel, and other radioactive wastes. These materials can remain radioactive and dangerous to human health for thousands of years. Radioactive waste is classified as low-level waste or high-level waste, with the radioactivity of these wastes ranging from slightly higher than natural background levels to much higher levels of radioactivity in used reactor fuel and parts of nuclear reactors.

Low-level waste (LLW) is typically sent to land-based disposal immediately following its packaging for long-term management. LLW constitutes about 90% of the volume of waste produced by nuclear technologies. It includes contaminated industrial or research waste, as well as tools, protective clothing, wiping cloths, and other disposable items that become contaminated with small amounts of radioactive dust or particles. LLW can be disposed of in near-surface disposal facilities, which are constructed vaults placed on or below the surface with a protective covering of a few meters thick.

Used fuel designated as high-level radioactive waste (HLW) requires storage to allow for the decay of radioactivity and heat, making handling safer. HLW storage can be in ponds or dry casks, either at reactor sites or centrally. One method of HLW disposal is deep geological disposal, such as the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico, which is a deep geologic repository for transuranic nuclear waste. Transuranic waste is contaminated by nuclear elements heavier than uranium, such as diluted plutonium.

The disposal of radioactive waste is subject to strict regulations to protect human health and the environment. These regulations govern the handling, transportation, storage, and disposal of radioactive materials. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is responsible for licensing facilities and ensuring compliance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards, while the EPA develops general environmental standards for radioactive waste management and disposal.

Nuclear accidents and their consequences

Nuclear accidents can have severe consequences for human health, the environment, and nuclear facilities. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) defines a nuclear and radiation accident as "an event that has led to significant consequences to people, the environment or the facility."

The most frequently cited example of a major nuclear accident is the Chernobyl disaster in 1986, which occurred at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Ukraine (then part of the Soviet Union). The accident directly killed 30 people, with 46 deaths recorded so far, and damaged approximately $7 billion worth of property. It released large amounts of radioactive isotopes, including iodine-131 (I-131), cesium-134 (Cs-134), cesium-137 (Cs-137), strontium-90 (Sr-90), and plutonium-239. These isotopes contaminated water, milk, food, and the environment, leading to internal and external exposure for those in the affected areas. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that there may be up to 4,000 additional cancer deaths related to the accident, and there were about 5,000 thyroid cancer cases. The radioactive fallout from Chernobyl was concentrated in Belarus, Ukraine, and Russia, and the long-term effects are still being studied through initiatives like the Chernobyl Tissue Bank.

Another notable nuclear accident is the Fukushima Daiichi disaster in 2011, which occurred due to a tsunami generated by an earthquake. This accident did not result in any immediate radiation deaths or radiation sickness, according to the United Nations Committee on Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR). However, the evacuation of residents caused suffering and death, particularly among the elderly, and led to long-term psychosocial health effects and stigmatization.

While major accidents are rare, nuclear accidents overall have impacted human health and led to socio-economic and psychological consequences. The U.S. program of atmospheric nuclear testing exposed various groups to fallout hazards, and lawsuits and compensation have been sought by affected citizens. Additionally, the creation and handling of radioactive waste is a significant environmental concern, as these materials can remain dangerous for thousands of years and require strict regulations for their storage and disposal.

Nuclear accidents can also have indirect consequences, such as the potential misuse of imported uranium for weapons-grade purposes, and the time lag between planning and operating a nuclear reactor, which can impact a country's energy strategy and emissions levels.

The water-intensity of nuclear energy production

Nuclear power plants are water-intensive in several ways. Firstly, water is used in the extraction and processing of uranium fuel. Uranium mining consumes between one and six gallons of water per million Btus of thermal energy output, depending on the mining method. The enrichment process, which involves enhancing the gaseous uranium to increase its effectiveness as fuel, accounts for about half of the water consumed in uranium processing. The next step, fuel fabrication, involves bundling the enriched uranium into fuel rods.

Secondly, water is used to produce electricity in nuclear power plants. Both boiling water reactors (BWRs) and pressurized water reactors (PWRs) boil water to generate steam, which then runs through a turbine to produce electricity. The steam is then cooled using either once-through or recirculating cooling systems. About 40% of US nuclear reactors use recirculating cooling systems, while 46% use once-through cooling.

Thirdly, water is necessary for controlling wastes and risks in nuclear power plants. High-level radioactive waste, such as spent nuclear reactor fuel, must be stored in specially designed pools of water, which help to cool the fuel and shield radiation. In the event of an accident, a significant amount of water may be needed for emergency cooling.

While nuclear power plants are water-intensive, they are more water-efficient than some other forms of electricity generation. Nuclear power plants use similar or slightly lower quantities of water compared to other methods of electricity generation, such as coal. Additionally, nuclear reactors do not produce air pollution or carbon dioxide during their operation, which can be beneficial for reducing overall pollution levels.

However, there are environmental concerns associated with nuclear power plants, particularly regarding the creation of radioactive wastes. These wastes, including uranium mill tailings and spent reactor fuel, can remain radioactive and hazardous to human health for thousands of years. The storage and disposal of these wastes require special regulations to protect human health and the environment.

The time lag between planning and operation of nuclear reactors

Nuclear power is often touted as a "'clean' carbon-free energy source. However, critics argue that it is not a viable solution to the climate crisis. One of the reasons is the time lag between planning and the operation of nuclear reactors.

The time lag between planning and the operation of a nuclear reactor includes multiple steps such as identifying a site, obtaining permits, purchasing or leasing land, obtaining financing and insurance, installing transmission, negotiating power purchase agreements, constructing the plant, and obtaining a final operating license. On average, it takes about 14.5 years to build a nuclear reactor, with planning-to-operation (PTO) times ranging from 10 to 19 years or more for all nuclear plants ever built. For instance, the Olkiluoto 3 reactor in Finland, proposed in December 2000, had an estimated completion date of 2020, resulting in a PTO time of 20 years. The Hinkley Point nuclear plant, planned to start in 2008, is expected to be operational between 2025 and 2027, with a PTO time of 17 to 19 years.

The lengthy planning-to-operation time for nuclear reactors has significant implications for addressing climate change. As nuclear plants take a long time to build, investing in them may lead to an increase in CO2 emissions instead of a decline. For example, China's investment in nuclear plants with long PTO times resulted in a 1.3% increase in CO2 emissions from 2016 to 2017, potentially causing 69,000 additional air pollution deaths in 2016 alone.

The time lag in nuclear reactor projects can be attributed to various factors. Firstly, the complexity and scale of nuclear reactor construction require significant planning and regulatory approvals. Secondly, the potential risks associated with nuclear energy, including weapons proliferation, meltdowns, and waste management, necessitate rigorous safety assessments and protocols. Additionally, there is a learning curve associated with nuclear reactor construction, and modern reactors often face longer construction times due to evolving regulatory environments and increased safety measures.

To address the time lag between planning and operation, there is a growing interest in modular reactors. These are smaller than conventional reactors and are often built off-site in factories. Modular designs allow for independent construction of each unit, reducing the impact of delays on the overall project. With modular reactors, there is an opportunity to improve construction processes and potentially reduce the time lag between planning and the operation of nuclear reactors.

Frequently asked questions