Nuclear is not a dirty word to some, but it is to others. Coal, on the other hand, is considered to be inherently dirty, both to mine and after it’s burned.
The global electricity mix remains dominated by fossil fuels; coal, as well as oil and gas, account for some 60%.
Yet the world is on track to reach or surpass the record total nuclear power generation (measured in terawatt-hours) previously reached in 2021 when 2,762 TWh of nuclear energy was generated worldwide.
Last year, 2,686 TWh was generated, up from 2,639 TWh in 2022. For comparison, in 2010 – a year before the Fukushima disaster in Japan in 2011 – there was 2,725 TWh of nuclear power generation globally. In 1970 it sat at just 79 TWh.
The national conversation about energy has gone nuclear as debate rages about how Australia can transition away from coal-fired power stations and towards decarbonisation.
As Mining.com.au reported on 1 July 2024, the Australian Liberal Party is going all in on nuclear energy ahead of the 2025 election, but debate and questions rage about whether the country will get behind it.
In June, Liberal Party leader Peter Dutton revealed the opposition’s plan to build seven nuclear power plants that would start rolling out in 2035. The reactors would be built on the sites of end-of-life coal-fired power stations, including in Gippsland in Victoria, Gladstone in Queensland, Port Augusta in South Australia, Collie in Western Australia, and the Hunter Valley in New South Wales.
Later that month, in an exclusive interview with Mining.com.au Executive Producer Shae Russell, renowned resources and commodities investor Rick Rule detailed how Australia’s rich endowment of uranium has created wealth and revenues for many countries – except for Australia itself.
The legendary investor first offered a caveat that he’s “broadly pro-nuclear and broadly anti-government” before detailing his views on the inconsistent policies for uranium exploration and development and those of federal Labor’s anti-nuclear stance.
Currently in Australia, nuclear power generation is prohibited federally.
“Australia has a wonderful uranium endowment, both in terms of natural resources, but also in terms of human resources. It’s interesting that perhaps as a consequence of the ‘three mines policy’, Australian people, humans, professionals, have brought wealth and revenues to countries around the world, with the possible exception, of course, of Australia,” Rule told this news service.
“It might be that Australian voters would like to deal with that inconsistency.”
Nuclear may not be a dirty word to some, whereas coal still is, however coal is an important ingredient in steelmaking, and in 2020–21 Australia was the world’s largest exporter of metallurgical coal and the second largest exporter of thermal coal.
Geoscience Australia states: “Australia’s coal resources are among the largest in the world. In 2021, in situ Economic Demonstrated Resources (EDR) of black coal were 89,012 million tonnes and brown coal amounted to 81,234Mt.”
Coal ‘by far, the dirtiest’
While the issue is polarising, Our World in Data lays out some bare facts about the dangers of each source of energy. It says that fossil fuels and biomass kill more people than nuclear and modern renewables per unit of electricity with coal “by far, the dirtiest”.
Assessing how each source of energy stacks up in terms of total deaths and short-term health risks, the data publication does note that fossil fuels still dominate the global electricity mix. As such, it’s expected the sector would kill more people.
Instead, a comparison is made based on the estimated number of deaths each source cause ‘per unit of electricity’ – measured in terawatt-hours. One terawatt-hour is about the same as the annual electricity consumption of 150,000 citizens in the European Union, according to Our World in Data. This includes deaths from air pollution and accidents in the supply chain.
The estimates for fossil fuels are likely to be very conservative. They are based on power plants in Europe, which the publication notes have sound pollution controls, and older models of the detrimental health effects of air pollution.
The online scientific data publication states that most people’s perceptions of the safety (or lack thereof) of nuclear energy are strongly influenced by two incidents – Chernobyl in Ukraine in 1986 and Fukushima in Japan in 2011.
To calculate the death rates used in those incidents, a death toll of 433 from Chernobyl and 2,314 from Fukushima directly were assumed. However, the official total for the number confirmed dead or listed as missing from the 2011 disaster from the tsunami in Japan is about 18,500.
“These were tragic events. However, compared to the millions that die from fossil fuels every year, the final death tolls were very low,” the publication writes.
However, it’s noted that the other energy source heavily influenced by a large-scale incident is actually hydropower. Since 1965 hydropower’s death rate is 1.3 deaths per TWh – almost completely dominated by one event – the Banqiao Dam Failure in China in 1975, with estimates of the death toll reportedly more than 150,000.
Had that not occurred, hydropower’s death rate would be just 0.04 deaths per TWh — comparable to nuclear, solar, and wind, Our World in Data reports.
Solar and wind deaths low but not zero
The death rates from both solar and wind are low but not zero. A small number of people have died along the supply chains, which range from helicopter collisions with turbines, to fires during the installation of turbines or panels, and drownings on offshore wind sites.
“The key insight is that they are all much safer than fossil fuels,” Our World in Data states.
“Nuclear energy, for example, results in 99.9% fewer deaths than brown coal, 99.8% fewer than coal, 99.7% fewer than oil, and 97.6% fewer than gas. Wind and solar are just as safe.”
Nuclear power generation has existed since the 1960s, but the sector experienced massive growth globally in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. In just 20 years, nuclear power generation rocketed from just 79 TWh in 1970 to 2,000 TWh in 1990.
As this news service previously reported, Terra Uranium (ASX:T92) Chairman Andrew Vigar says nuclear is not a dirty word and the debate in Australia has become too “politicised”.
He told Mining.com.au recently he was a little disappointed that the issue has become politicised because that can distort the facts.
“I’m a scientist obviously and I prefer to deal with facts. We’ve been active in this space … for a long time now because it is one of the primary baseload energy sources available to any country in the world, including Australia, and we’ve been ignoring that for a long time,” he told this publication earlier this month.
“So, I guess I’m pleased that it’s out there a bit more in the public domain and ordinary people out there are taking a bit more attention.”
The Minerals Council of Australia has thrown its support behind the Coalition’s nuclear policy. Its CEO, Tania Constable, says Australia’s strong global reputation for non-proliferation, and its world-class uranium industry – which includes almost a third of global uranium reserves and supplies around 10% of global uranium used for zero-emissions electricity – positions it well to lead in nuclear energy development.
She says nuclear energy complements renewables energy generation to deliver industrial heat requirements, while also maintaining Australia’s credibility with trading partners to attract the investment needed to unlock the country’s mineral wealth.
Presently, exploration and mining for the silvery grey metal are only permitted in South Australia, the Northern Territory, and Tasmania. Exploration is allowed in Queensland and New South Wales, but mining uranium is not.
In 2008, Western Australia opened the door to allow uranium mining – but the State Government has implemented a ‘no uranium’ condition on future mining leases. Projects granted state ministerial approval by the previous government will still be allowed to progress. Yet there’s a condition issued in which no future mining leases will be issued. Permitting is allowed but for only four previously approved projects to proceed in the state.
Adding to these inconsistencies, the government in Western Australia prefers there is no uranium mining in the state, which also prohibits U3O8 exports through its ports with future production instead poised to be shipped via Darwin or Adelaide.
In Australia, black coal is produced in Queensland, New South Wales, Western Australia, South Australia, and Tasmania, with the majority exported to overseas markets. According to the Department of Industry, Science and Resources, at the end of 2021, export earnings from black coal totalled $63.51 billion, up from $43.37 billion at the end of 2020. Japan and other Asian countries are prime destinations for Australian coal.
In 2021, coal exploration expenditure was $226.2 million, a decrease of 22.4% on 2020 ($291.6 million). Much of the expenditure occurred in Queensland, and coal exploration was some 6% of the 2021 total exploration spend, as per the Australian Bureau of Statistics (2023).
Australia in 2021 also held 14% of the world’s coal reserves (black and brown), ranking third behind the US (23%) and Russia (15%). Australia is thought to hold about 10% of world economic resources of black coal and ranks fourth behind the US (29%), China (18%), and India (14%). For brown coal, the country’s share of the world’s economic resources is 23%, ranking Australia second in the world behind Russia (28%).
Australia also accounted for nearly 6% of coal production (black and brown), ranking fifth behind China, India, Indonesia, and the US.
Nuclear may not be a dirty word to some, while coal is, however as the data illustrates, the world still heavily relies on fossil fuels for its energy. As previously mentioned, coal is also an important ingredient in steelmaking, and in 2020–21 Australia was the world’s largest exporter of metallurgical coal and the second largest exporter of thermal coal.
Most of the world is focused on a net zero emissions future yet in the quest to decarbonise the global economy, however in parallel a net zero death toll from all sources of energy should also be the goal.
Write to Adam Orlando at Mining.com.au
Images: Stock & Our World in Data
