Dear Nuclear

French nuclear power plants program slowly started in the late sixties and was boosted in the seventies when the first oil crisis (Yom Kippur War) demonstrated the risk of France dependence on imported energy. From 1975 to 1995, the bulk of French electro-nuclear industry was built. 80% of power generation in France is now nuclear with 58 reactors in operation, making France second only to USA where 104 reactors are being run for a population 5 times greater. With such infrastructure, over 400 TWh of electrical power were produced in France each year for the past 20 years. Assuming power generation thermal efficiency of 35%, it saves each year 100 Mtoe (Million tons of oil equivalent), or 140 Mtce (Million tons of coal equivalent).

100 Mtoe is approximately the yearly oil production of Nigeria. It is also the yearly total primary energy consumption of Poland. In other words, French nuclear power production alone saves the full energy intake of a medium economy, or the full oil output of a medium oil producer, year in year out. Which is a lot of hundreds of millions of CO2 tons that did not aggravate Global Warming.

Low CO2 emissions, but what about nuclear waste? According to ANDRA (French national agency for managing radioactive waste), the total volume of nuclear waste at the end of current French electro-nuclear program (say by 2050) will be 4.3 million m3 (including dismantled power plant materials), while it is a third of this value today. Half of the 4.3 million m3 will be very low radioactivity waste, presenting very low risk when properly stored, and even less if scattered (hence diluted) by natural causes. The next category is waste with short life weak or medium activity: 1.9 million m3 in 2050, 0.9 million m3 today. Short life means that activity is halved every 31 years or less. It is deemed harmless after 200 or 300 years. In a stable country such as France one can optimistically think that this waste will remain adequately stored and controlled for these durations. The last two categories are waste with long life weak or medium activity, 0.25 million m3 in 2050, and waste with high activity, only 10,000 m3. The two categories would stack up to 30m high on a soccer field, including a 1m layer of high activity. The latter could also be contained inside 3 Olympic swimming pools. Their management and safe long term storage (for the longer life ones) is an arduous issue, but the low volumes make it non urgent and they will surely benefit from technology progress in the long run (why not eventually ship the highest risk ones into the sun?).

Last but not least, intrinsic safety of electro-nuclear industry is a big worry of public opinion. Three major accidents occurred in the last 50 years, Three Mile Island (1979), Chernobyl (1986) and Fukushima (2011). Compared to most other industries, including fossil fuels, or to many human activities, this is an extremely low figure which does not warrant stopping electro-nuclear production. Just like for aviation, each incident or accident triggers preventive measures which are progressively implemented on the existing power plants.

All things considered, nuclear power production has been and will continue to be beneficial to France and our dear warming planet. Germany’s example, to rapidly phase down nuclear against development of intermittent renewable energies (wind, sun),  while maintaining extensive coal and lignite power production as well as high CO2 emissions, should not be followed by France.  Risks and residues can be adequately controlled in a politically and geologically stable country with strong science and technology resources, surrounded by similar countries.

Nuclear power must rebound and grow again. France could even become the base power supplier of Western Europe, helping its neighbours phase out fossil fuels.