Nuclear , Climate Change Climate Change, Nuclear Energy, and Just Transitions

Isabella Alcañiz is a Professor of Government and Politics and the Director of the Latin American and Caribbean Studies Center at the University of Maryland.

The transition to a more sustainable, low-carbon energy future should be undertaken with social justice and equity as guiding principles. Often referred to as Just Transition, this goal aims to mitigate the economic and social impacts on already vulnerable communities that arise from transformative changes, such as shifting from fossil fuels to cleaner sources like nuclear energy. Historically disadvantaged communities, who bear a disproportionate burden of environmental and climate hazards, must be prioritized in this transition. While nuclear energy offers a viable path for rapid decarbonization, its benefits—like jobs, energy security, and technological investment—must be equitably distributed. Additionally, the costs, such as potential environmental risks and the long-term responsibility of nuclear waste management, should not be disproportionately placed on marginalized communities. To achieve a just transition, policies must be enacted that ensure local hiring, invest in community education and development, and prioritize marginalized communities for benefits like grid resilience and energy discounts.

Incorporating nuclear energy into just transition frameworks demands a re-evaluation of energy policies to include social dimensions. Just transition policies should not merely focus on reducing carbon emissions but must also address social inequalities through workforce development, inclusive decision-making, and public investments targeted at marginalized communities. This involves crafting policies that facilitate education and skills training in nuclear science and engineering, especially targeted at communities affected by the phasing out of fossil fuel industries. Furthermore, rigorous oversight should be put in place to ensure that nuclear facilities are not sited disproportionately near marginalized communities, or if they are, that these communities are granted significant economic and infrastructural benefits. Given the long lifecycle of nuclear facilities, long-term community contracts could ensure sustained local economic benefits and create a societal safety net for vulnerable populations.

Climate change and nuclear energy, though seemingly discrete issues, intersect in various dimensions, particularly in the context of an increasingly insecure global order. While climate change poses existential threats to human societies, nuclear energy remains a controversial yet potent solution to decarbonizing the global energy supply. In a world grappling with the consequences of changing weather patterns, rising sea levels, and heightened resource competition, the secure operation and management of nuclear facilities becomes ever more crucial. This article examines some of the interconnectedness between climate change and nuclear energy and suggests discussion themes to ensure the security of nuclear installations amidst climate upheavals and geopolitical tensions.

As countries strive to meet their climate targets, some are turning to nuclear energy as a low-carbon alternative. This increases the number of nuclear facilities worldwide, thereby amplifying the potential sites of disaster risk or conflict. It should be noted as well that even before the climate crisis, nuclear energy was not always considered an attractive option when fossil fuel prices rose, despite advocacy from many in the industry.

Climate change exacerbates resource scarcities, particularly freshwater. Many nuclear power plants, being thermoelectric, rely heavily on vast amounts of freshwater for cooling. In regions facing acute water stress due to climate change, the operation of nuclear plants could further strain limited resources. Such tensions can escalate conflicts between states or communities that share these resources. Given the potential for significant conflict around the use of water, and given the heavy reliance on freshwater for cooling, nuclear facilities should diversify their cooling sources, exploring options such as air-cooling or using treated wastewater.

Rising sea levels, intensified storms, and unprecedented heatwaves pose direct threats to the infrastructure of nuclear facilities. For instance, the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi disaster in Japan, caused by a tsunami, highlighted the vulnerabilities of nuclear power plants to extreme climatic events. Such disasters not only cause immediate radiation threats but also have lasting geopolitical implications, as nations grapple with contamination, mass evacuations, and strained diplomatic relations.

Relatedly, nuclear facilities should be designed or retrofitted to withstand the direct impacts of climate change. Elevated structures, fortified against sea-level rise and storm surges, advanced cooling systems that can function efficiently in higher temperatures, and redundant safety systems can reduce vulnerabilities. This should be done with special attention to vulnerable populations and communities nearby.

States should undertake comprehensive climate threat analyses for existing and planned nuclear facilities. This involves understanding not only direct climate threats but also the cascading socio-political effects of climate change, such as migration patterns.

Countries should collaborate on setting global standards for nuclear safety, factoring in climate change impacts. Joint research, shared best practices, and coordinated emergency response plans can foster trust and reduce the chances of misunderstandings or escalations. This is particularly critical among Global South countries as the burden of unjust transitions will affect these states the most.

Relatedly, states should maintain open communication lines with their neighbors about their nuclear programs and safety measures. Openness and transparency in nuclear diplomacy and politics significantly reduces the probability of conflict.

Engaging local communities in the safety and security processes of nuclear facilities can act as an additional layer of oversight. An informed, empowered, and involved community can facilitate safer siting and reduce conflict. It also helps make just energy transitions more robust.

Older nuclear plants or those in particularly vulnerable locations (e.g., near coastlines exposed to rising sea levels) should be considered for decommissioning. Their operational life can be replaced with newer, safer designs or alternative renewable energy sources.

In conclusion, addressing the complexities at the nexus of climate change, global security, and nuclear energy requires a multidimensional, equitable, and cooperative strategy. Leveraging technological advancements must be balanced with ethical and social considerations, ensuring that the transition to a more sustainable future is both secure and just. Multilateral cooperation and robust frameworks for governance, scientific research, and public engagement are vital. While nuclear energy may offer some promise for a low-carbon future, the equitable and socially responsible deployment of this technology is critical. By adopting a holistic approach that integrates social equity into the very fabric of our energy policies, we can navigate the intricacies of a nuclear-powered future in a world of climatic uncertainties.