Is nuclear energy safe?

Nuclear meltdowns can never be completely eliminated

Question: Is nuclear energy safe?
Position1 of 2›: Nuclear energy is not safe
Argument‹2 of 2: Nuclear meltdowns can never be completely eliminated

Nuclear meltdowns are always a possibility. Though we have been able to mitigate them when they have occurred in the past, there is no guarantee we can mitigate them when they occur in the future.

The argument

Accidents can and do happen. Even in the best managed plants that were planned and built with the highest levels of safety in mind, there is always a chance of a nuclear meltdown. With Chernobyl, the meltdown was caused by a design flaw and a lack of safety culture. While the type of nuclear reactors used at the Chernobyl facility have either been decommissioned or have addressed the design flaw that caused the Chernobyl disaster, there are still 10 in operation. The scientific community widely considers these reactors to be more unstable and less safe than western style reactors. At Fukushima, the meltdown was caused by an earthquake and tsunami. In the Fukushima accident, all safety measured kicked in--the plant automatically shut down when the earthquake was detected. However, after the shutdown, the generators which were circulating coolant through the reactor to keep it stable were damaged by the tsunami. The generators stopped pumping coolant through the reactor which resulted in the nuclear meltdown. The simple fact of the matter is, nuclear reactors are highly complex and have a lot of moving parts. All it takes is one missed cue or faulty part to cause an accident, and when dealing with nuclear reactions, an accident can be catastrophic. There is no way to completely eliminate the chance of nuclear meltdown. Nuclear energy is not safe.

Premises

[P1]Even the best-managed plants cannot rule out meltdowns: Chernobyl resulted from a design flaw and poor safety culture (10 such reactors still operate), while Fukushima melted down when a tsunami disabled the coolant generators despite an automatic shutdown. [P2] Nuclear reactors are highly complex with countless moving parts, so a single missed cue or faulty component can trigger a catastrophic accident that no design can completely prevent. [C] Therefore, because nuclear meltdowns can never be completely eliminated, nuclear energy is not safe.

Counter-arguments

The Chernobyl accident was largely a result of a lack of safety culture in the Soviet Union. Since the disaster, there has been lots of progress made in regard to safety measures, the design of nuclear plants, and the cooperation between governments to ensure that a disaster like Chernobyl does not occur again.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P2] There are highly-qualified professionals who ensure that these plants function properly.

Proponents cited

David Lochbaum, Edwin Lyman
“Years of poor regulation and inadequate safety controls left the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant dangerously unprepared when an earthquake and resulting tsunami hit in March 2011. Fukushima’s aftermath includes hundreds of square miles of uninhabitable land, tens of thousands of relocated people, and billions of dollars of economic loss—ranking it alongside Chernobyl as one of the world’s worst nuclear disasters. Ongoing challenges with managing the damaged reactors—and concerns about radiation releases—mean the Fukushima disaster is far from over. Fukushima wasn’t a “Japanese” nuclear accident—it was an accident that happened to occur in Japan. In fact, if exposed to similarly complex challenges, all 99 operating reactors in the United States would likely have similar outcomes. Worse, Japanese and U.S. regulators share a mindset that severe, supposedly “low probability” accidents are unlikely and not worth the cost and time to protect against. Fukushima showed that unlikely events do occur.”
Stephanie Pappas
“That reactor, a design called the RBMK-1000, was discovered to be fundamentally flawed after the Chernobyl accident. And yet there are still 10 of the same type of reactor in operation in Russia. How do we know if they're safe? The short answer is, we don't. These reactors have been modified to lessen the risk of another Chernobyl-style disaster, experts say, but they still aren't as safe as most Western-style reactors. And there are no international safeguards that would prevent the construction of new plants with similar flaws.”