The Climate Vulnerabilities of Global Nuclear Power

Abstract

Nuclear power—a source of low-carbon electricity—is exposed to increasing risks from climate change. Intensifying storms, droughts, extreme precipitation, wildfires, higher temperatures, and sea-level rise threaten supply disruptions and facility damage. Approximately 64 percent of installed capacity commenced operation between thirty and forty-eight years ago, before climate change was considered in plant design or construction. Globally, 516 million people reside within a fifty mile (80 km) radius of at least one operating nuclear power plant, and 20 million reside within a ten mile (16 km) radius, and could face health and safety risks resulting from an extreme event induced by climate change. Roughly 41 percent of nuclear power plants operate near seacoasts, making them vulnerable to increasing storm intensity and sea-level rise. Inland plants face exposure to other climate risks, such as increasingly severe wildfires and warmer water temperatures. No entity has responsibility for conducting risk assessments that adequately evaluate the climate vulnerabilities of nuclear power and the subsequent threats to international energy security, the environment, and human health. A comprehensive risk assessment by international agencies and the development of national and international standards is necessary to mitigate risks for new and existing plants.

An Anthropocene species of trouble? Negative synergies between earth system change and geological destratification

“…These are compounded by bioaccumulation, transference along food webs and intergenerational transmission (Dewar et al, 2013; Pereira et al, 2014), making radioactive contamination a quintessential ‘slow emergency’ (Anderson et al, 2020). While nuclear power is celebrated in some quarters as a low carbon form of energy, the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster triggered by the Tōhoku tsunami has had knock-on impacts in the nuclear industry by exposing the vulnerability of nuclear infrastructure to climate or Earth system change (Jordaan et al, 2019; Krausmann et al, 2019).…”

“…Few of the world’s 430-plus operational nuclear power plants were constructed with climate change in mind, leaving many exposed to the potentially catastrophic effects of storm surges, drought, floods, heatwaves, wildfire and sea level rise (Bartos and Chester, 2015; Jordaan et al, 2019;). Generally positioned close to water bodies for cooling purposes, the vulnerability of reactors to hydrometeorological extremes has been made increasingly apparent by events such as the 1999 storm-surge that knocked out safety systems at France’s Blayais Nuclear Power Plant (de Fraguier, 2010; Kopytko and Perkins, 2011), and the flooding during Superstorm Sandy that threatened water intake systems at New Jersey’s Oyster Creek and Salem plants (Shifflett and Shepherd, 2014).…”

“…Generally positioned close to water bodies for cooling purposes, the vulnerability of reactors to hydrometeorological extremes has been made increasingly apparent by events such as the 1999 storm-surge that knocked out safety systems at France’s Blayais Nuclear Power Plant (de Fraguier, 2010; Kopytko and Perkins, 2011), and the flooding during Superstorm Sandy that threatened water intake systems at New Jersey’s Oyster Creek and Salem plants (Shifflett and Shepherd, 2014). However, the international treaties and standards that regulate construction and operation of nuclear facilities have yet to seriously consider impacts of climate change (Jordaan et al, 2019), an oversight that extends to nuclear waste management. Most of the 80,000 metric tons of radioactive spent fuels thus far generated in the US is stored ‘temporarily’ at power-plant sites – many of which are vulnerable to sea level rise (Jenkins et al, 2020).…”

Moving at the Speed of Trust: Radical and Progressive Change through Climate Justice Movements in Aotearoa

“…Initially part of the peace movement, the contemporary nuclear debate is just as relevant to the environment and climate change. However, opinion is divided, some viewing it as a solution to emissions intensive energy production (Sailor et al, 2000), while others note the maladaptation risks of nuclear energy (Jordaan et al, 2019). Taylor (2008) observed the replication of international trends in collective action in Aotearoa, such as rifts between old and new social movements, entering a phase of renewal, and the merging of cultural and material grievances.…”