Social Acceptability of Proposed Nuclear Power in the UK
Nuclear power, being a sustainable and reliable energy source in a global context of ever increasing social concerns about global warming, climate change and trustworthy energy supply, has always been a main talking point when coming to look at the social acceptability of power generation. In recent years, there have been many issues brought up by 'green groups' and local residents which reside close to a power plant who have tried to prevent, stop or eradicate the current running or the proposed opening of a new nuclear power plant.
However, many may argue that these people may have a point and Nuclear Power should be eliminated from the face of the Earth. This may be understandable due to past nuclear events and mishaps which have caused pain and suffering for so many. The Chernobyl accident in 1986 was the largest failure in the history of nuclear energy and was the result of a flawed reactor design that was controlled by personnel with inadequate training and experience. As a result, five percent of the radioactive reactor core was released into the atmosphere releasing a deadly mix of chemicals. Within the following four months, 28 people died from radiation or thermal burns. Later, 19 People died from the same burns and there have been large increases of thyroid cancer in the area which may be linked to the failure. Consequently, a further 9 people died bringing the total to 56 (as of 2004). This type of failure will not be tolerated again and so therefore, some have decided that the only way to ensure this is to fully remove it as an energy source.
On the other hand, some groups view other issues as larger, more pressing matters. The main concern with the 'Green Party' is the waste which is produced by nuclear power plants and how it would be stored.
They state that:
"In the UK we already have 2.3 million cubic metres of nuclear waste in storage, and the introduction of new power stations will lead to a higher volume and a doubling of the amount of radioactivity in our nuclear waste legacy... If the Romans had invented nuclear power, the spent fuel from their power stations would still be around today - and still be just as dangerous as it was 2,000 years ago." - www.younggreens.greenparty.org.uk
However, in recent years, there have been several breakthroughs in the expertise and facilities which could be used to break down and store the produced waste from nuclear power stations. There have also been plans to create a large international facility 500 metres underground for nuclear waste disposal in Australia. This would be a suitable location as the rock here has been stable for several hundred million years and so the dependence on engineering containers or barriers for the waste would not be as big of an issue.
This leads on to the topic of education. It may be presumed that many of the sceptical and anti-nuclear groups and members of the general public are not educated with the knowledge of exactly how the nuclear power generation and its legacy is carried out. This may lead them to believe that nuclear power is a dangerous and alarming option. Furthermore, through no fault of their own, millions of people automatically and subconsciously link nuclear power generation to nuclear weapons generation. This may again affect their views and create a biased and unfair opinion on nuclear power. The only way to regress their initial preconceptions is to re-educate those who do not understand the process. This will enable them to view the overall method and the practices carried out with nuclear power generation and only then, can they go on to form their own balanced opinions.
Presently in the EU, 80% of the public show an opposed or balanced view towards nuclear energy with only 20% in favour of nuclear power. This is the lowest value when compared with all other types of energy sources as shown below.
A large problem with the social acceptability of nuclear power is how the modern day media portray aspects of the nuclear process and possible issues which arise. The media are able to put across any image of nuclear power they want to the reader and so can easily create a biased and unfair report. An example of this was the Three Mile Island incident which occurred in Pennsylvania, USA in 1979. A cooling malfunction caused part of the core to melt and radioactive gases were released into the atmosphere which proved to be non-harmful and were safely contained. However, in the following days of the incident, there was mass confusion, stress and fear which were all encouraged and exasperated by the media. The Washington post headlined "Crisis at Three Mile Island" going on to suggest that there maybe be a nuclear shower when the core melts, that an immediate evacuation may be required and that they were all now human Guinea Pigs. However, they did not to mention that the incident was controlled successfully and that the radiation released into the atmosphere was only equivalent to the same amount of radiation released from a chest X-ray per person.
These reports and misinterpretations have all lead to a negative effect on the social acceptability of nuclear power. If the UK is to embrace nuclear power and move on into the 21st century, generating its own reliable, consistent and sustainable energy, it must work on turning around these opinions to enable the development and fabrication of new nuclear power stations.
