City research shows the investment and health risks of new nuclear build are low

January 5, 2012

As part of The SPRing Report published in December 2011, Professor Philip Thomas of the Risk Management, Reliability and Maintenance Group within City's Systems and Control Centre provided comparative analysis of the costs and safety considerations associated with nuclear, renewable and traditional, fossil fuel-based energy options.

Two analysis techniques were used, beginning with the "real options" method, which provides an objective basis for judging when it is reasonable to invest in competing products, when their future price has a high degree of uncertainty. This projected that is expected to become competitive on a cost-basis with gas-powered electricity in 2015, while it will take until 2032 and 2040 for onshore and offshore wind power to reach the same point*.

Secondly, the "J-value" framework was adopted. Developed at City, it offers a common, objective scale to assess the risks posed to human health by various technologies and the amount of money that might reasonably be spent to eliminate them.

This was used to assess the impact that future built from 2010 to 2070 would have on human mortality, taking the entire fuel supply chain and construction, operation and decommissioning into account**. The research also examined whether health risks would be: posed to industry staff or the general public; immediate or delayed; and due to ongoing operations or major accidents.

Explaining the outcomes, Professor Thomas says: " has the highest impact compared with other technologies, mainly as a result of the widespread effect of pollution emissions. Nuclear has the lowest impact, followed by gas and onshore and offshore wind.

"This may seem surprising to some people, but are generally small, require low volumes of fuel and produce large amounts of energy. This mitigates against many of the safety and environmental risks that are posed by or the large-scale production of steel for the high number of wind turbines needed, for example.

"Even when being most pessimistic about the effects of radiation globally, including after large nuclear accidents, the impact of nuclear power is still lower than or comparable with those from gas and wind."

The SPRing Report includes these findings along with other technical, economic, environmental, social and ethical recommendations. These are designed to help government and industry make long-term policy and investment decisions about nuclear power and its place in the wider UK energy mix. It can be downloaded at www.springsustainability.org .

Explore further: Recycling wind turbines

More information: Thomas, P. and N. Chrysanthou (2012). Using Real Options to Compare the Economics of Nuclear and Wind Power with Electricity from Natural Gas. Nuclear Energy. Special issue of J of Power and Energy. In press.

Kearns, J., et al(2012). Comparative Risk Analysis of Electricity Generating Systems Using the J-Value Framework. Nuclear Energy. Special Issue of J of Power and Energy. In press.

Related Stories

Recycling wind turbines

September 21, 2007

The development of wind power promises much in terms of providing us with renewable energy for the future and wind turbines could be the most effective way to harness that power. Danish researchers now suggest that in order ...

Nuclear cannibals

March 4, 2008

Nuclear energy production must increase by more than 10 percent each year from 2010 to 2050 to meet all future energy demands and replace fossil fuels, but this is an unsustainable prospect. According to a report published ...

Report: Nuclear power investment should not be delayed

March 30, 2011

The UK can realise a £10 billion economic opportunity through adopting a new, holistic approach to nuclear energy that would tackle concerns over security of energy supply, rising oil prices and safety issues, says a ...

Is nuclear power fair for future generations?

May 5, 2011

The recent nuclear accident in Fukushima Daiichi in Japan has brought the nuclear debate to the forefront of controversy. While Japan is trying to avert further disaster, many nations are reconsidering the future of nuclear ...

Rebalancing the nuclear debate through education

September 9, 2011

Better physics teaching with a particular emphasis on radioactivity and radiation science could improve public awareness through education of the environmental benefits and relative safety of nuclear power generation, according ...

How sustainable is nuclear power for the UK?

December 8, 2011

The research into the sustainability of nuclear and other electricity options in the UK shows that nuclear power could make a significant contribution to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 2035. However, that would require ...

Recommended for you

For these 'cyborgs', keys are so yesterday

September 4, 2015

Punching in security codes to deactivate the alarm at his store became a thing of the past for Jowan Oesterlund when he implanted a chip into his hand about 18 months ago.

How to curb emissions? Put a price on carbon

September 3, 2015

Literally putting a price on carbon pollution and other greenhouse gasses is the best approach for nurturing the rapid growth of renewable energy and reducing emissions.

Magnetic fields provide a new way to communicate wirelessly

September 1, 2015

Electrical engineers at the University of California, San Diego demonstrated a new wireless communication technique that works by sending magnetic signals through the human body. The new technology could offer a lower power ...

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.