The Ethical Dilemma of Nuclear Energy
In this post I will take a critical look at nuclear energy and whether it should continue as a base load provider—a base load provider is a power plant or source that consistently delivers a minimum amount of electricity to meet the grid's steady, continuous demand. I believe that nuclear requires a critical assessment, and one that goes beyond simple carbon comparisons in this carbon-myopic world.
Nuclear is often promoted as a “cleaner” alternative to coal and other fossil fuels due to its low direct emissions, this framing generally ignores the broader ethical and environmental consequences of this technology. One of the most pressing concerns is obviously radioactive waste, which remains hazardous for thousands of years with no universally safe disposal method. Sites like Yucca Mountain, a “deep geological repository storage facility,” have been stalled due to concerns over long-term containment, raising serious ethical questions about passing this burden onto future generations (Macfarlane, 2020).
Nuclear plants require quite wild amounts of water for cooling, causing thermal pollution that disrupts aquatic ecosystems and threatens biodiversity (van Vliet et al., 2016). This heavy reliance on water makes nuclear power increasingly unsustainable in a climate-chaotic world. While proponents continue to argue that nuclear energy is safe, disasters such as Chernobyl and Fukushima have demonstrated the catastrophic consequences of reactor failures, with long-term human and ecological costs that far outweigh short-term energy benefits (Ramana, 2016). Uranium mining, the first step in the nuclear cycle, disproportionately impacts Indigenous communities, exposing them to environmental degradation and radiation hazards (Brugge & Goble, 2002).
Although nuclear power does not emit carbon during energy production, its full lifecycle emissions—including uranium extraction, plant construction (converting ecological habitats to construction sites as an example), waste storage, and decommissioning—are often underestimated (Kharecha & Hansen, 2013). Economically, nuclear power is no longer competitive if we really get down to the nitty-gritty. The cost per megawatt-hour of new nuclear projects far exceeds that of renewable energy (which isn’t without its own problems), making it a poor investment for long-term sustainability (Lazard, 2023).
If we are looking strictly at transitional energy, rather than doubling down on an expensive and risky technology like nuclear, we should prioritize decentralized, community-controlled energy systems such as wind, solar, and small-scale hydropower, which do not (generally speaking) produce hazardous waste or require vast water resources. By integrating battery storage and demand-responsive grids, in theory, renewable systems can provide energy security without the risks associated with nuclear power. Nuclear does at first glance seem like an appealing transitional energy source, but its ethical and environmental burdens make it an unsuitable solution for a truly sustainable future.
This is not to say that the current state of “renewable energy” is not stricken with its own issues; however, at the very minimum, a responsible energy transition should be built on systems that do not create inter-generational harm, and that align with ecological resilience rather than industrial dependency on systems of extraction, depletion, and desecration through the deposition of highly unsafe waste products. We must also seriously look at the amount of energy we use, and realize we must use less energy, not continue to use the same, or more, just in a more “green” way—this is not a path toward a sustainable future.
References
Brugge, D., & Goble, R. (2002). The history of uranium mining and the Navajo people. American Journal of Public Health, 92(9), 1410-1419. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.92.9.1410
Kharecha, P. A., & Hansen, J. E. (2013). Prevented mortality and greenhouse gas emissions from historical and projected nuclear power. Environmental Science & Technology, 47(9), 4889-4895. https://doi.org/10.1021/es3051197
Lazard. (2023). Levelized cost of energy analysis – Version 16.0. Retrieved from https://www.lazard.com
Macfarlane, A. (2020). Nuclear waste: The challenge of interim storage. Science, 370(6522), 146-147. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abe2664
Ramana, M. V. (2016). The checkered history of nuclear power and its likely future. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 72(3), 180-189. https://doi.org/10.1080/00963402.2016.1170360
van Vliet, M. T. H., et al. (2016). Power-generation system vulnerability and adaptation to changes in climate and water resources. Nature Climate Change, 6, 375-380. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2903