Q. We believe that nuclear power can become safer through technological innovations, like the atomic reactor financed by Bill Gates. But, opponents of nuclear plants claim that an accident occurs inevitably and, they say, humankind can never control nuclear energy. What do you think about this?
We are living through a technological revolution that has impacted nuclear technology as well. But anti-nuclear activists focus entirely on reactor technology that was developed in the 1960’s and ignore the tremendous advances that have been made, though many are only now beginning to be commercialized.
One can never say that no accident will ever occur. But we do know that when accidents have occurred, even at an old 1960’s era reactor like Fukushima, the result is not the apocalypse that anti-nuclear activists claimed it would be. It’s a terrible situation for those who’ve had to leave their homes to be sure.
But one needs to be realistic about risk. Powering a modern civilization carries an element of risk. But the risk of burning fossil fuels far exceeds the risk of depending on advanced nuclear energy. It is estimated that 3 million people die EVERY YEAR from fossil fuel pollution. By comparison there are only about 56 known deaths caused by commercial nuclear power and all of those occurred at Chernobyl.
Q. In the US, the shale gas revolution is taking place. It seems, the climate change problem has settled down in the world. The tide seems to be running in favor of fossil fuels, rather than nuclear energy. How do you think about it?
I don’t know about Japan, but climate change is very much on the minds of young people all over the world. The consequences of climate change are becoming more apparent with each passing year. It is true that in the United States, gas seems to be plentiful and cheap and this is displacing all alternative energy sources, including nuclear.
I suspect that in the not too distant future the United States will be buying advanced modular reactors from China. Likely Japan will too.
