Nuclear Crisis in Japan: Implications for the Future of Nuclear Power

Ever since the 9.0 earthquake rocked Japan, non-stop coverage of the tragedy has inundated the media. Satellite images show barren wastelands where vibrant cities stood before, photographs of survivors show grieving Japanese citizens, and urgently worded articles speculate about the effect the catastrophe will have on global financial markets. However, one story seems to stand above the cacophony. Several reactors at the Fukushima I nuclear power plane currently sit precariously on the edge of meltdown, and the media seems unable to focus on anything else.

Fukushima I power plant

The vacuum of knowledge about nuclear power generation among the general public makes the situation at the Fukushima power plant perfect fodder for hysteria. Headlines flippantly compare the unfolding events to the Chernobyl disaster of 1986--widely considered the worst nuclear accident in history. However, futher reading among more sober sources reveals the fact that the current situation is not on the same scale and has little potential for progressing to that point.

You're probably wondering (as I was) just exactly what is happening at the Japanese power plant. Details have become more scarce throughout the past day or so, but this is what is known. When the earthquake originally struck, the electric pumps responsible for pumping cooling water through the reactors were knocked offline. The pumps are critical for the safe operation of the power plant because they prevent the reactor cores from overheating and succumbing to a runaway chain reaction. When these pumps fail--as they did in this case--the reactor is at risk of a "meltdown" a little understood term with myriad sinister connotations.

A nuclear reactor meltdown occurs when the core temperature spikes from its norm around 550 degrees Fahrenheit to several thousand--hot enough to melt the fuel rods and destroy them. Under these extreme conditions, the fuel rods can melt to the bottom of the steel and concrete enclosure that houses them. It was once thought that the fuel could melt through the bottom of the enclosure "all the way to China"--a scenario referred to as "the China syndrome." Previous meltdowns (Chernobyl and Three Mile Island) have shown that the fuel rods are not hot enough to accomplish this. Thus, a meltdown is a dangerous event and a disaster for the owner of the reactor, but in general it is not a global health threat.

What makes the Japanese reactors safer than those at Chernobyl? First, reactor design outside of Russia is much different than that found at Chernobyl. For instance, the control rods in reactor 4 of the Chernobyl power plant--the reactor responsible for the toxic explosion--were made out of graphite. When a small hydrogen explosion exposed the graphite control rods to the air, they ignited. The fire ejected massive amounts of radioactive material into the atmosphere so that it could be spread far and wide. Where the Chernobyl plant used graphite, the Fukushima plants use water--water doesn't burn. A second major design difference is the containment vessel. The containment vessels at the Fukushima plant are formidable where as Chernobyl had no containment vessel. Current indications from Japan are that the containment vessels at Fukushima are still intact.

Wreckage of Chernobyl power plant (reactor 4 centered)

A small dose of perspective goes a long way in ameliorating hysteria. Headlines blare such vague alarms so as to be meaningless e.g. "Japan: Nuclear plant emits radiation in the atmosphere." Breaking news: "So does your microwave." Not to make light of a serious situation, but such headlines, while good for garnering page views, are also good for inducing paranoia. We are exposed to radiation every day. The dangerous aspect of radiation is its intensity rather than its presence. The amount of radiation emitted by the Japanese plant so far is well short of a disaster and has almost no chance of reaching Chernobyl proportions.

The negative attention drawn to the nuclear power industry at large threatens Obama's agenda of battling America's addiction to oil with nuclear energy. An event such as the one we're witnessing in Japan certainly gives reason to reasses the health risks, but it should not halt a critical march toward energy independence. The safety concerns arising from the Japan incident, while relevant, are somewhat dampened by updates in reactor design. The reactors at the Fukushima plant are so called generation II reactors. The generation III reactors that would be built in the US operate using a passive cooling system thus eliminating the risk of failing cooling water pumps. These design updates are just one of the reasons that Obama, as recently as today, still includes $36 billion of loan guarantees in his budget for the construction of new nuclear power plants.

The earthquake and aftermath in Japan are truly tragic. The country is certainly in dire need of aid and rebuilding. I would even go so far as to say that the media attention helps ensure that the country receives the aid it so desperately needs. However, alarmist headlines focused on largely peripheral issues only serve to engender panic and perpetuate paranoia. Nuclear power is one of the few paths that leads us out of a politically and environmentally unsustainable dependence on oil. Sacrificing this progress in the name of attention grabbing headlines is tragic.