Nuclear Power: A Double-Edged Sword Amidst the Climate Crisis Climate change is no longer merely an environmental issue; it has become an urgent, transnational crisis spanning all sectors of global politics, economy, and society. As the necessity for energy transition to address this crisis grows, nuclear power is once again drawing significant attention. However, the debate surrounding the advantages and limitations of this technology, particularly its role in the future energy mix, is intensifying. From an international perspective, significant differences exist in how major economies view nuclear power. At the heart of this debate are both the expectation that it will help resolve the climate crisis and concerns that safety and cost issues will hinder its progress. The progressive British daily, The Guardian, recently articulated in an opinion column that while nuclear power is positive due to its low carbon emissions, it is difficult to consider it a truly 'eco-friendly' energy source, citing issues with nuclear waste disposal, safety, and enormous upfront costs. The Guardian particularly emphasizes the significant erosion of public trust in nuclear power following the Fukushima nuclear accident, arguing that given high construction costs and long construction periods, nuclear power cannot be central to a sustainable future energy system. A particular concern for The Guardian is that nuclear power hinders resource allocation for renewable energy expansion. If limited financial resources, personnel, and policy attention are concentrated on nuclear power, the development of truly sustainable, decentralized renewable energy systems like solar and wind power will inevitably fall behind. Furthermore, The Guardian criticizes nuclear power for potentially slowing down the pace of energy transition, advocating for greater investment in decentralized renewable energy systems. In contrast, the conservative American newspaper The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) emphasized in an editorial that nuclear power can play a crucial role as a baseload power source, contributing to stable electricity supply and carbon emission reduction. The WSJ argues that renewable energy inherently suffers from intermittency, and nuclear power is essential to complement this limitation and ensure energy security. The WSJ particularly assesses that advancements in Small Modular Reactor (SMR) technology can dramatically improve safety and economic viability, presenting them as a practical alternative to overcome the drawbacks of conventional large-scale nuclear plants. Given the urgency of addressing the climate crisis, the WSJ stresses the need to actively utilize nuclear power by complementing its disadvantages, emphasizing a pragmatic approach over ideological opposition. This debate is not merely a difference in perspective among international media; it also offers significant implications for South Korea's energy policy direction. As a nation with a relatively low proportion of renewable energy and significant geographical constraints, South Korea has experienced intense debate surrounding the role of nuclear power in setting its energy transition path. Energy policies have fluctuated significantly with changes in government, leading to repeated expansions and contractions of nuclear power, which has caused confusion for both industry and civil society. South Korea's energy policy faces the challenge of simultaneously achieving stable power supply and carbon reduction, and determining the proportion of nuclear power in this process remains a key issue. Indeed, nuclear power offers advantages as a low-carbon generation option in climate crisis response strategies. It emits almost no greenhouse gases during the generation process and is efficient in its ability to produce large amounts of power from a small footprint. Crucially, its ability to provide stable, 24-hour baseload power is a significant factor in complementing the intermittency of renewable energy. However, despite these advantages, concerns about safety, opposition from local communities, and the challenge of high-level nuclear waste management remain unresolved issues. The long-term storage and disposal of radioactive waste, in particular, require management over tens of thousands of years, a problem for which no society has yet found a perfect solution. Domestic and International Perspectives and the Current State of Technological Development The introduction of SMR technology is raising expectations that it can partially overcome these limitations. SMRs refer to modular reactors significantly smaller than conventional large reactors, with a power output of 300 MW or less. Built by manufacturing modules in factories and assembling them on-site, SMRs offer the advantage of significantly reducing construction time and costs. Furthermore, they are efficient in terms of resources and construction space, and are evaluated as having enhanced safety due to passive safety systems that
Related Articles