The article “The small nuclear power plants billed as an energy fix” is about an energy company in Denmark, Seaborg Technologies which has invented a new type of nuclear reactor that is much smaller and cheaper than the conventional large and expensive nuclear reactors and address the problem regarding the fears of safety involving nuclear disasters we have seen in the past. These reactors are housed on floating barges and use molten soft to moderate reactions which prevent large-scale disasters from occurring. Moreover, this article also includes skepticism from professionals in the industry as well as some concern from the director-general of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.
Of course, nuclear energy is known to be very clean and much more efficient than other alternatives such as Solar and thermoelectric energy, but the question remains to this day, are the tradeoffs from this energy worth the potential for another nuclear disaster in our future? having had such devastating incidents such as Chernobyl and Fukushima would make anyone wonder if it is possible to use this technology without there ever having issues again. This company thinks that they have found the solution to this problem; however, this technology may not be available for a number of years meanwhile other alternatives like wind and solar are growing leaving nuclear behind such is an example with Germany who has greatly invested in wind energy and has practically abandoned nuclear energy. I do believe that one day companies will have technology advanced enough to ensure with 100% certainty that there will not be another nuclear disaster, but I think that day is still off into the future. I personally am in favour of nuclear energy due to many factors such as it being a low-carbon energy source but also because the nuclear sector creates many jobs in different aspects and stages of production from the construction of nuclear power plants to running as well as the decommissioning of plants and waste. However; I think there are too many skeptics and too many countries who are steering away from it to become a more mainstream form of energy any time soon regardless of the reduction in pollution it would bring as well as the individual reduction of businesses’ carbon footprint.
Iceland’s renewable energy efforts has been set as goal to the rest of the world in my opinion. Do you think that disasters like you have mentioned can be avoided with proper planning and exploitation of nuclear energy or we have to follow the Iceland’s way?
In order to reduce the risk of accidents involving nuclear energy it is worth exploring other sources of energy. With proper research thermonuclear energy may become a viable alternative, at it is less of a danger to the environment and may become even more efficient than nuclear fission which is the topic of your article.