Clean Energy
Visualizing All the Nuclear Waste in the World
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 Class | Disposed (cubic meters) | Stored (cubic meters) | Total (cubic meters) |
---|---|---|---|
Very low-level waste | 758,802 | 313,882 | 1,072,684 |
Low-level waste | 1,825,558 | 204,858 | 2,030,416 |
Intermediate level waste | 671,097 | 201,893 | 872,990 |
High-level waste | 3,960 | 5,323 | 9,283 |
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.
Clean Energy
Visualized: The Four Benefits of Small Modular Reactors
What advantages do small modular reactors offer compared to their traditional counterparts?
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 | |
---|---|---|
Capacity | 470 MW | 1,000 MW |
Area Requirement | 10 Acres* | 832 Acres |
Land/Space Efficiency | 47 MW/Acre | 1.2 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.
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.
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 Investment | Required 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.
-
Electrification1 year ago
Visualized: How the Power Grid Works
-
Energy Shift9 months ago
Ranked: The Cheapest Sources of Electricity in the U.S.
-
Energy Shift1 year ago
Animated: 70 Years of U.S. Electricity Generation by Source
-
Clean Energy1 year ago
Breaking Down Clean Energy Funding in the Inflation Reduction Act
-
Emissions1 year ago
Visualizing Global Per Capita CO2 Emissions
-
Decarbonization1 year ago
The U.S. Utilities Decarbonization Index
-
Clean Energy1 year ago
The 30 Largest U.S. Hydropower Plants
-
Clean Energy7 months ago
Breaking Down the $110 Trillion Cost of the Clean Energy Transition