Nuclear Waste
Nuclear fission reactors produce highly radioactive waste which is hard to dispose of because it must be either well diluted (sometimes within a glass or ceramic block), or kept refrigerated for decades. One reason nuclear fusion reactors are interesting is because they promise to create less waste, of lower radioactivity. Also, their deuterium fuel is far more abundant than uranium. Only 1 out of 6500 hydrogen atoms are deuterium. Still, our oceans contain a vast supply of deuterium. Due to enormous technical problems, nuclear fusion is unlikely to become a viable source of energy within your lifetime.
Although (supposedly) cheap to run, fission power generators are hugely costly to build and may turn out even more costly to decommission. They show no sign of being economically viable. Nevertheless, between 1978-1991 Japan, America and Europe collectively spent $72 billion on nuclear power research. This compares to a mere $3 billion spent on solar cells and $7 billion on energy conservation during the same period.* Solar energy and other renewable resources, together with conservation are far more likely to be part of our energy future than nuclear reactors of any design.
*The Economist, February 5, 1994, p68.
A test fusion reactor (called International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor – ITER) is going ahead; to be built by a consortium of nations including Japan, France, Russia, China, S. Korea, and the U.S.A. Canada fortunately dropped out of the project. The proposed price tag is $5 billion to build and another $5 billion to run for 20 years.* The very nature of such a project suggests that the price tag will more than double before a spade is put in the earth, and then continue to rise! Moreover, this reactor will be “experimental”. It will produce no saleable electricity, but will soak up enough to power a medium-sized city . . . !
*The Economist Feb 7, 2004, p74-75.