New investigation shows nuclear power will last longer, cause less emissions
Media Release, Wednesday 21 December 2005
Nuclear power would be a cheaper and more environmentally friendly option in Australia than commonly thought, a University of Melbourne study has shown.
A group of scientists from the University of Melbourne, led by Associate Professor Martin Sevior in the School of Physics, has produced a dedicated study of the energy problems confronting Australia in the future. They compared the environmental impact, health risks, economic effects and social implications of the use of fossil fuels, renewable energy sources such as wind and solar energy, and nuclear power.
They have presented their results on a new website: nuclearinfo.net.
Their investigation significantly impacts the nuclear debate, with findings showing that hundreds of times more uranium could be available than was predicted in a widely quoted study by van Leeuwen and Smith.
Associate Professor Sevior says Van Leeuwen and Smith also seriously overestimate the energy needed to mine uranium and construct nuclear power plants.
He says that all the researchers involved in his study started from a clean state and employed full quantitative analyses where possible.
“We took care to select the most authoritative data sources and we've made these available on the website. The idea was to be totally transparent and make it as easy as possible for others to repeat our calculations. Everyone can scrutinise our calculations and sources of data."
“Nuclear power would not only cause less damage to the environment than proposed by van Leeuwen and Smith, but would provide enough energy for everyone on Earth for well over 200 years, even if current nuclear power plants continue to be used, which is unlikely.”
The University of Melbourne research group investigated the energy required to build and operate a nuclear power plant. To this end they employed independently audited statistics made available by the Swedish Energy Utility, Vattenfall.
The scientists find that the energy cost to build a power plant would be ‘paid back’ within one and a half months of its establishment, and that the disposal of nuclear waste would add just one and a half more months to that total. Van Leeuwen and Smith predicted that nuclear power plants would take 7 - 10 years to 'pay back' these energy costs.
They also investigated the energy cost of mining uranium from the Olympic Dam mine in South Australia and found that it is at least 10 times smaller than predicted by van Leeuwen and Smith. Consequently the world's uranium resource base is likely to be hundreds of times greater than the previous research suggested.
Associate Professor Sevior said that the methodology used by van Leeuwen and Smith, which is often cited during debates on nuclear power in Australia and overseas, was flawed, with some figures utilised off by over a factor of 10.
“This previous research overestimated the energy costs and carbon emissions generated by the construction of nuclear power plants and for mining uranium,” he said.
“It is suggested in debates that the energy cost of extracting uranium from new mines would be so high that there is little point in developing a nuclear power industry – that is simply not true.
"We also found that substantial progress has been made for disposal of waste in deep geological formations. In addition, new ideas to burn nuclear waste with either high-powered proton accelerators or in advanced reactors have been developed."
Associate Professor Sevior said that nuclear technology is developing at a rapid pace, with new power plant designs proposed that will enable more efficient use of uranium, increasing the possible use of uranium fifty-fold and significantly reducing the amount of nuclear waste.
“Power plants will become more efficient and will continue to provide significant amounts of energy, without impacting the environment in the same way as coal and other fossil-fuel power stations,” he said.
“Nuclear power plants can also provide hydrogen for cars, something that will be necessary in the future, particularly as the price of oil continues to rise.”
As energy consumption and the resulting pollution continue to grow, Associate Professor Sevior said that alternative energy sources need to be looked at in detail by impartial researchers, and academics with expertise in such areas have a responsibility to become involved.
“Groups that are for and against nuclear power can then have an open dialogue based on accurate figures and sound empirical research.
"Although we find there is a credible case for nuclear power plants, there have been many mistakes in its deployment in the past. If we decide to utilise nuclear energy we should learn from these mistakes."
For more information:
Associate Professor Martin Sevior
School of Physics
Tel: 03 8344 5438
Mob: 0425 828 278
Email: msevior@physics.unimelb.edu.au
Website: nuclearinfo.net
|
|
