Connect with us

Clean Energy

Visualizing All the Nuclear Waste in the World

Published

on

The following content is sponsored by the National Public Utilities Council

 

Visualizing All the Nuclear Waste in the World

Nuclear power is among the safest and cleanest sources of electricity, making it a critical part of the clean energy transition.

However, nuclear waste, an inevitable byproduct, is often misunderstood.

In collaboration with the National Public Utilities Council, this graphic shows the volume of all existing nuclear waste, categorized by its level of hazardousness and disposal requirements, based on data from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Storage and Disposal

Nuclear provides about 10% of global electricity generation.

Nuclear waste, produced as a result of this, can be divided into four different types:

  • Very low-level waste: Waste suitable for near-surface landfills, requiring lower containment and isolation.
  • Low-level waste: Waste needing robust containment for up to a few hundred years, suitable for disposal in engineered near-surface facilities.
  • Intermediate-level waste: Waste that requires a greater degree of containment and isolation than that provided by near-surface disposal.
  • High-level waste: Waste is disposed of in deep, stable geological formations, typically several hundred meters below the surface.

Despite safety concerns, high-level radioactive waste constitutes less than 0.25% of total radioactive waste reported to the IAEA.

Waste ClassDisposed (cubic meters)Stored (cubic meters)Total (cubic meters)
Very low-level waste758,802313,8821,072,684
Low-level waste1,825,558204,8582,030,416
Intermediate level waste671,097201,893872,990
High-level waste3,9605,3239,283

Stored and disposed radioactive waste reported to the IAEA under the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management. Data is from the last reporting year which varies by reporting country, 2019-2023.

The amount of waste produced by the nuclear power industry is small compared to other industrial activities.

While flammable liquids comprise 82% of the hazardous materials shipped annually in the U.S., radioactive waste accounts for only 0.01%.

Learn how the National Public Utilities Council is working towards the future of sustainable electricity.

Click for Comments

Clean Energy

Visualized: The Four Benefits of Small Modular Reactors

What advantages do small modular reactors offer compared to their traditional counterparts?

Published

on

The preview image for an infographic explaining the four benefits of small modular reactors (SMRs) over traditional nuclear reactors, highlighting SMR advantages related to costs, time, siting, and safety.

Visualized: The Four Benefits of Small Modular Reactors

Nuclear power has a crucial role to play on the path to net zero. Traditional nuclear plants, however, can be costly, resource-intensive, and take up to 12 years to come online. 

Small modular reactors (SMR) offer a possible solution. 

Created in partnership with the National Public Utilities Council, this infographic explores some of the benefits SMRs can offer their traditional counterparts. Let’s dive in. 

The Four Key Benefits of SMRs, Explained

An SMR is a compact nuclear reactor that is typically less than 300 megawatts electric (MWe) in capacity and manufactured in modular units. 

Here are some of the benefits they offer. 

#1: Lower Costs

SMRs require a lower upfront capital investment due to their compact size.

SMRs can also match the per-unit electricity costs of traditional reactors due to various economic efficiencies related to their modular design, including design simplification, factory fabrication, and potential for regulatory harmonization. 

#2: Quicker Deployment

Traditional nuclear plants can take up to 12 years to become operational. This is primarily due to their site-specific designs and substantial on-site labor involved in construction.

SMRs, on the other hand, are largely manufactured in factories and are location-independent, which minimizes on-site labor and expedites deployment timelines to as little as three years. This means they can be deployed relatively quickly to provide emissions-free electricity to the grid, supporting growing electricity needs

 #3: Siting Flexibility and Land Efficiency

SMRs have greater siting flexibility compared to traditional reactors due to their smaller size and modular design. In addition, they can utilize land more effectively than traditional reactors, yielding a higher output of electrical energy per unit of land area.

Rolls-Royce SMR, UK (Proposed)Median-Sized U.S. Nuclear Plant
Capacity470 MW1,000 MW
Area Requirement10 Acres*832 Acres
Land/Space Efficiency47 MW/Acre1.2 MW/Acre

*Estimated area requirement

Given their flexibility, SMRs are also suitable for installation on decommissioned coal power plant sites, which can support the transition to clean electricity while utilizing existing transmission infrastructure.  

 #4: Safety

SMRs have simpler designs, use passive cooling systems, and require lower power and operating pressure, making them inherently safer to operate than traditional reactors.

They also have different refueling needs compared to traditional plants, needing refueling every 3–7 years instead of the 1–2 years typical for large plants. This minimizes the transportation and handling of nuclear fuel, mitigating the risk of accidents. 

The Road Ahead

As of early 2024, only five SMRs are operating worldwide. But with several other projects under construction and nearly 20 more in advanced stages of development, SMRs hold promise for expanding global emission-free electricity capacity.

With that said, certain obstacles remain for the wide-scale adoption of SMRs in the United States, which was particularly apparent in the 2023 cancellation of the NuScale SMR project. 

To fully realize the benefits of SMRs and advance decarbonization efforts, a focus on financial viability, market readiness, and broader utility and public support may be essential.

Learn how the National Public Utilities Council is working toward the future of sustainable electricity.

Continue Reading

Clean Energy

The $3 Trillion Clean Energy Investment Gap, Visualized

In this graphic, we explore the $3 trillion clean energy investment gap visualized by sector, according to BloombergNEF data.

Published

on

The preview image for an alluvial diagram of 2023 clean energy investments by sector compared to what’s needed for net-zero 2050, indicating that there is a $3 trillion annual investment gap.

The $3 Trillion Clean Energy Investment Gap, Visualized

Global investment in the clean energy transition grew by 17% in 2023, showing resilience despite geopolitical tensions, high interest rates, and inflation. 

But was it enough to keep the world on track to hit net zero by 2050? 

To answer this question, we compare 2023 clean energy investment by sector with what’s annually needed to reach net zero by 2050, in partnership with the National Public Utilities Council

The Investment Gap, By Sector 

According to BloombergNEF data, annual global investment in the energy transition is at an all-time high. Despite this, only the electrified heat and clean industry sectors are meeting the thresholds necessary to hit net zero by 2050.

2023 InvestmentRequired Annual
Investment for Net Zero*,
2024–2030
Investment Gap
Electrified transport$632B$1,805B$1,173B
Renewable energy$623B$1,317B$694B
Electricity grids$310B$700B$390B
Electrified heat$63B$50B-$13B
Clean industry$49B$21B-$28B
Energy storage$36B$93B$57B
Nuclear energy$33B$284B$251B
Carbon capture and storage (CCS)$11B$510B$499B
Hydrogen$10B$62B$52B
TOTAL$1,767B$4,842B$3,075B

*BloombergNEF’s Net-Zero 2050 Scenario 

To stay on track for net zero by 2050, the yearly investments in electrified transport, renewable energy, power grids, and energy storage must more than double their current rates for the rest of the decade. 

Hydrogen, nuclear, and carbon capture and storage (CCS) have an even steeper hill to climb and must grow 6, 9, and 46 fold, respectively. 

The Path Forward

It’s important to note that despite the current annual investment gap of $3T, the clean energy industry continues to exhibit positive trends.

Investment in electrified transport, for instance, surpassed that in renewable energy for the first time in 2023, marking a win for the sector. 

Emerging sectors also experienced robust expansion despite being furthest off-target. Investments in hydrogen tripled to $10B, CCS nearly doubled to $11B, and energy storage witnessed a 76% increase to reach $36B in 2023. 

These encouraging developments underscore the industry’s potential to drive transformative change and pave the way for a more sustainable and resilient energy landscape in the years ahead. 

Learn how the National Public Utilities Council is working toward the future of sustainable electricity.

Continue Reading
National Public Utilities Council

Popular