Nuclear Power and Global Warming

1. Nuclear Power and Global Warming Kurt Gottfried Physics Department, Cornell University April 16, 2007

2. IPCC Statements in 2007(abbreviated) • Greenhouse gas concentrations have increased markedly due to human activities since 1750 and now far exceed pre-industrial values spanning many thousands of years. The increases in carbon dioxide are due primarily to fossil fuel and land use changes, those of methane and nitrous oxide to agriculture. (January) • Observational evidence from all continents and most oceans shows that many natural systems are being affected by regional climate changes, particularily temperature increases. (April 6)

4. To have reasonable confidence that global warming (GW) will not cause catastrophic environmental phenomena, temperatures should not rise by more than 2 deg C above pre-industrial levels, which requires a cut in GHG emissions of order 80% below current levels by 20250 !

8. The risks posed by global warming are such that a major expanion of nuclear power is a prudent option: I agree I disagree C. Not now, perhaps in the future

9. Which risks from nuclear power do you feel are most serious: A. Power plant accident B. Terror attack on power plant C. Disposal of radioactive waste D. Proliferation to terrorists

10. Nuclear power -- benefits and risks Nuclear power plants emit no greenhouse gases The energy released by both nuclear power and nuclear weapons is ultimately due to the fission of uranium or plutonium. Therefore nuclear power and nuclear weapons are inextricably linked. Nuclear power therefore carries risks of catastrophic events not carried by any other means for reducing global warming – in particular, that of the detonation of a nuclear weapon made by terrorists with materials obtained from a civilian nuclear power system, or by a state that adopts a civilian nuclear power program as a cover for a nuclear weapons program; or the massive release of radiation from a power plant meltdown due to a terrorist attack.

11. The risks posed by global warming are such that a major expanion of nuclear power is a prudent option: I agree I disagree C. Not now, perhaps in the future

14. Processes in Nuclear Power Plant n + U(235)  fission + 2.5 n (on average) n + U(238)  Pu(239) + 2 electrons

16. Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) Administrations stated objectives: Reduce net cost of nuclear power Ease nuclear waste problem Stem nuclear proliferation

17. Cost GNEP requires new class of nuclear power plants using Pu as fuel Now only conceptual designs of unproven performance and cost Cost projections are that system with reprocessing will be substantially More expensive than current system using U without reprocessing -- French use reprocessing, their electricity costs much more than that from US nuclear power Waste Claim that system with reprocessing will allow geological depository (Yucca, for example) to have greater capacity incorrect

18. GNEP and proliferation Waste from U-burning plants theft proof, but Pu can be handled by YOU! Keeping track of Pu in reprocessing stream to accuracy needed to Rule out theft very difficult -- withness Japanese experience Why should “States of Concern” buy into arrangement that excludes them From nuclear fuel production ?? GNEP has encouraged sale of French reprocessing technology Congress should restore Ford-Carter policy banning reprocessing

19. Nuclear power today in the US • 103 operating nuclear power plants, devoted entirely to producing electricity • – • -- about 20% of the nation’s electricity supply • -- or 8% of the total energy consumed in the US. • Nuclear power no “silver bullet for solving climate change problem” • Many other technologies needed • even if a major expansion of nuclear power were to occur

22. Basic ingredients of domestic US energy policy addressing global warming to extent and pace needed Develop as many options as possible, deploy first those that are proven and achieve largest reductions at lowest cost and risk -- especially renewables – conservation and efficiency California is role model -- uses 60% of US average per capita Nuclear power does not meet these criteria no new nuclear plants could be completed before 2014 according to government estimates, plants with genuinely advanced designs no earlier than 2025. new plants could not make a substantial contribution to reducing GHG emissions in the US for another 25 to 30 years.

23. Set emission targets and establishing a mandatory carbon tax or • cap-and-trade system to compel all energy providers • to compete on level playing field. • Would make nuclear power more competitive; • how well remains to be seen. • Nuclear power has had major subsidies. • Yet no new plants ordered since 1978, unable to attract investors • Greatly expand government investment in energy R&D. • Now less than half 1979 level • minuscule compared with R&D for defense and homeland security • -- should be commensurate with threat to national security • from global warming

24. As for nuclear power Expansion of nuclear power under effective regulations and oversight a long-term option if other climate-neutral means for producing electricity prove inadequate. Whether or not there is a major expansion: Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) needs thorough overhaul strong Congressional oversight; transparency restored; better protection against terrorism. Disproportionate direct and indirect subsidies to nuclear power should not be provided to new nuclear plants. Continued support for nuclear power R&D focused on safety, security, waste issues

25. Summary & Conclusions Global Warming implies that all measures that reduce GHG emissions must be considered, including nuclear power, bearing in mind costs and risks to security and safety major expansion of nuclear power in the US is not feasible in the near term, and cannot make a significant contribution to cutting GHG emissions for another 25-30 years resolution of long-standing problems regarding regarding nuclear plants, and a through reform of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, are preconditions for an expansion the government should establish market conditions that take the true cost of GHG into account; whether nuclear power could then compete without subsidies is unclear Congress should restore the ban on extraction of Pu from spent fuel; the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership in its present form fosters proliferation & shows little prospect of producing cheaper nuclear power the government should greatly expand support of R&D for energy conservation and energy technologies that reduce or eliminate GHG emissions.