You need JavaScript to view this

Nuclear power: the future reassessed

Journal Article:

Abstract

In recommending that consent be given for the construction of a further Pressurized Water Reactor at Hinkley Point in Somerset, UK, the Inspector at the Public Inquiry underlined two major benefits: (i) the contribution an additional large nuclear plant would make to the strategic objective of diversity of supply, and (ii) the environmental benefits of nuclear power compared to many alternative forms of electricity generation. The major environmental advantages of nuclear power over fossil fuel combustion arise both because of the small amounts of fuel required - 1/18,000 compared to coal - thus minimizing transport needs and land use, and because of the virtual absence of atmospheric emissions from nuclear stations. Nuclear reactors emit no acid gases and the nuclear fuel cycle gives rise to only small amounts of carbon dioxide. An expansion of the nuclear option is often opposed on three grounds; the need to dispose of radioactive waste; the danger of the proliferation of nuclear weapons and the risk of a large scale accident. However all these doubts can be answered and the arguments supporting nuclear safety are summarized. It is argued that the contribution to primary energy demand in Europe could be doubled or trebled by 2020  More>>
Authors:
Roberts, L [1] 
  1. East Anglia Univ., Norwich (UK). Environmental Risk Assessment Unit (ERAU)
Publication Date:
Feb 01, 1991
Product Type:
Journal Article
Reference Number:
AIX-22-056637; EDB-91-093310
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Oxford Energy Forum; (UK); Journal Volume: 1:4
Subject:
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY; 21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS; NUCLEAR POWER; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS; PLANNING; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; ENERGY CONSUMPTION; ENERGY POLICY; EUROPE; GREENHOUSE EFFECT; POWER DEMAND; POWER GENERATION; PROLIFERATION; PWR TYPE REACTORS; RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL; REACTOR SAFETY; RISK ASSESSMENT; ECONOMICS; GOVERNMENT POLICIES; MANAGEMENT; POWER; REACTORS; SAFETY; WASTE DISPOSAL; WASTE MANAGEMENT; WATER COOLED REACTORS; WATER MODERATED REACTORS; 290600* - Energy Planning & Policy- Nuclear Energy; 290300 - Energy Planning & Policy- Environment, Health, & Safety; 210200 - Power Reactors, Nonbreeding, Light-Water Moderated, Nonboiling Water Cooled
OSTI ID:
5779441
Country of Origin:
United Kingdom
Language:
English
Other Identifying Numbers:
Journal ID: ISSN 0959-7727; CODEN: OENFE
Submitting Site:
GBN
Size:
Pages: 9-10
Announcement Date:
Aug 01, 1991

Journal Article:

Citation Formats

Roberts, L. Nuclear power: the future reassessed. United Kingdom: N. p., 1991. Web.
Roberts, L. Nuclear power: the future reassessed. United Kingdom.
Roberts, L. 1991. "Nuclear power: the future reassessed." United Kingdom.
@misc{etde_5779441,
title = {Nuclear power: the future reassessed}
author = {Roberts, L}
abstractNote = {In recommending that consent be given for the construction of a further Pressurized Water Reactor at Hinkley Point in Somerset, UK, the Inspector at the Public Inquiry underlined two major benefits: (i) the contribution an additional large nuclear plant would make to the strategic objective of diversity of supply, and (ii) the environmental benefits of nuclear power compared to many alternative forms of electricity generation. The major environmental advantages of nuclear power over fossil fuel combustion arise both because of the small amounts of fuel required - 1/18,000 compared to coal - thus minimizing transport needs and land use, and because of the virtual absence of atmospheric emissions from nuclear stations. Nuclear reactors emit no acid gases and the nuclear fuel cycle gives rise to only small amounts of carbon dioxide. An expansion of the nuclear option is often opposed on three grounds; the need to dispose of radioactive waste; the danger of the proliferation of nuclear weapons and the risk of a large scale accident. However all these doubts can be answered and the arguments supporting nuclear safety are summarized. It is argued that the contribution to primary energy demand in Europe could be doubled or trebled by 2020 with considerable benefits in overall safety environmental impacts at no extra cost. (author).}
journal = {Oxford Energy Forum; (UK)}
volume = {1:4}
journal type = {AC}
place = {United Kingdom}
year = {1991}
month = {Feb}
}