Changes

[[file:St54Figure42.JPG|thumb|300px|Nuclear units in operation.<ref name=Salvador_2005>Salvador, Amos, 2005, Energy: A historical perspective and 21st century forecast: AAPG Studies in Geology 54, 208 p.</ref>]]

[[file:St54Figure42.JPG|thumb|300px|Nuclear units in operation.<ref name=Salvador_2005>Salvador, Amos, 2005, Energy: A historical perspective and 21st century forecast: AAPG Studies in Geology 54, 208 p.</ref>]]

At the time when the world is becoming increasingly concerned about the discharge of carbon dioxide (CO₂) and other harmful gases and particulates into the atmosphere, and about the presumed resulting global warming (for which oil-, gas-, and mostly coal-burning electricity-generating plants are blamed), nuclear electric plants have the indisputable advantage, along with [[hydroelectric power|hydroelectric]] plants, of being the only potential large-scale suppliers of electricity that do not contribute polluting combustion products to the environment. Nuclear power plants generate electricity without combustion. In addition, the fuel is so concentrated that only small amounts are needed per unit of energy delivered.  

At the time when the world is becoming increasingly concerned about the discharge of carbon dioxide (CO₂) and other harmful gases and particulates into the atmosphere, and about the presumed resulting global warming (for which oil-, [[Natural gas|gas]]-, and mostly [[coal]]-burning electricity-generating plants are blamed), nuclear electric plants have the indisputable advantage, along with [[hydroelectric power|hydroelectric]] plants, of being the only potential large-scale suppliers of electricity that do not contribute polluting combustion products to the environment. Nuclear power plants generate electricity without combustion. In addition, the fuel is so concentrated that only small amounts are needed per unit of energy delivered.  

Other advantages of nuclear power put  forward by its supporters are that it is cheaper and safer than other means of generating electricity (both of which are questioned by its detractors) and, potentially, an almost inexhaustible source of energy. This is particularly the case if the fast breeder reactors, which can generate (breed) new fuel (i.e., convert uranium 238 into plutonium) in quantities as large as, or even larger than, the amount consumed, can be accepted and operated safely and economically.

Other advantages of nuclear power put  forward by its supporters are that it is cheaper and safer than other means of generating electricity (both of which are questioned by its detractors) and, potentially, an almost inexhaustible source of energy. This is particularly the case if the [http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Current-and-Future-Generation/Fast-Neutron-Reactors/ fast breeder reactors], which can generate (breed) new fuel (i.e., convert uranium 238 into plutonium) in quantities as large as, or even larger than, the amount consumed, can be accepted and operated safely and economically.

Rhodes and Beller<ref name=Rhodesandbeller_2000>Rhodes, R., and D. Beller, 2000, [http://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:31039830 The need for nuclear power-Viewpoint on the world's challenging energy future]: International Atomic Energy Agency Bulletin, v. 42, no. 2, p. 43-50.</ref> capably defend the desirability of nuclear power. Concerning the disputed cost advantage, they state <blockquote>Larger nuclear power plants require larger capital investments than comparable coal or gas plants only because nuclear utilities are required to build and maintain costly systems to keep their radioactivity from the environment. If fossil-fuel plants were similarly required to sequester the pollutants they generate, they would cost significantly more than nuclear power plants do.<ref name=Rhodesandbeller_2000p47>Rhodes, R., and D. Beller, 2000, [http://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:31039830 The need for nuclear power-Viewpoint on the world's challenging energy future]: International Atomic Energy Agency Bulletin, v. 42, no. 2, p. 47.</ref></blockquote>

Rhodes and Beller<ref name=Rhodesandbeller_2000>Rhodes, R., and D. Beller, 2000, [http://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:31039830 The need for nuclear power-Viewpoint on the world's challenging energy future]: International Atomic Energy Agency Bulletin, v. 42, no. 2, p. 43-50.</ref> capably defend the desirability of nuclear power. Concerning the disputed cost advantage, they state <blockquote>Larger nuclear power plants require larger capital investments than comparable coal or gas plants only because nuclear utilities are required to build and maintain costly systems to keep their radioactivity from the environment. If fossil-fuel plants were similarly required to sequester the pollutants they generate, they would cost significantly more than nuclear power plants do.<ref name=Rhodesandbeller_2000p47>Rhodes, R., and D. Beller, 2000, [http://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:31039830 The need for nuclear power-Viewpoint on the world's challenging energy future]: International Atomic Energy Agency Bulletin, v. 42, no. 2, p. 47.</ref></blockquote>