Nuclear energy is the bomb

“Radioactive” is not just a new hit song by Las Vegas band Imagine Dragons. In fact, nuclear energy is the future of Nevada and the United States as a whole. Yucca Mountain evokes raw emotion, mostly fear, and a knee-jerk NIMBY (Not-In-My-Backyard) reaction. But perhaps it’s time for us to re-evaluate our preconceptions about nuclear energy and embrace Nevada’s historical relationship with it as a source of revenue and energy innovation.

Earlier this year, the Obama administration and the Department of Energy said that by 2048, the U.S. will establish a permanent national nuclear waste repository facility. Nearly 50 years after Congress mandated a deadline for Yucca Mountain to be in operation, nuclear waste, for the time being, may not be considered as much of an issue for Nevadans as it once was—and this is beside the point that while many Nevadans are upset by the threat of a repository, many can’t even point out Yucca Mountain on a map.

Nuclear energy has had great success in other parts of the world as a clean, effective, sustainable and relatively inexpensive means of generating power. In France, more than 75 percent of its electricity comes from its nuclear technology, and 17 percent of that is from recycled nuclear fuel. In 2012, it was estimated that France gains over 3 billion euros annually from exporting its electricity. These numbers are staggering, and Nevada could be among the pioneers to bring the nuclear revolution to the United States.

The organization Nevadans 4 Carbon Free Energy, www.nv4cfe.org, is a nonpartisan group that is currently seeking to implement the Nevada Energy Park, a project “for the storage of nuclear spent fuels, reprocessing those fuels and generating power.” Through the Energy Park, the group estimates that billions of dollars will be brought to Nevada in nuclear commerce such as research, technology and jobs. Modern designs exist for safe, inexpensive, small-format self-contained reactors that produce sufficient power for a neighborhood’s electricity, heating and cooling, and hot water over a long period (years) without need of refueling or maintenance. Some estimates say that 30 years worth of energy could be provided to a neighborhood for only $40,000 total, a significantly less expensive route than traditional energy sources. In addition, most of the energy generated from Hoover Dam is sold to southern California, while Reno and Las Vegas get their electricity from fossil fuels and some geothermal resources. The development of nuclear power could greatly simplify Nevada’s energy needs.

The trick to making nuclear technology possible and widely encouraged is education. For example, most people don’t know what nuclear waste looks like. A single unit of nuclear waste is about the size of a jelly bean. It’s solid, not gaseous or oozing green liquid, and the whole unit is comprised of 30 percent nuclear waste and 70 percent ceramic coating, all packaged within several containers and layers of protection. It’s difficult to imagine that someone could be exposed to the toxicity of the waste by accident. But the thing is, reprocessing removes the need to even store waste, and nuclear engineers can tell exactly how much of each compositional element is left over and process it into something useful.

Reliance on carbon-based means of energy is ultimately unsustainable, and the opportunities for private enterprise in the field of nuclear technology are vast and lucrative. Nuclear is cheaper than most other forms of energy, including coal, geothermal, wind and solar, and while there is high initial overhead for operating a nuclear power plant, the long-term benefits are worth it. Science supports nuclear technology as a viable source of energy. The prevention of nuclear power development in Nevada stems from ignorance and political pandering to people who don’t understand its potential as an energy source.