Advances in nuclear technology , the rising prices of oil and gas and increasing dependence on foreign oil has set the US lawmakers thinking about whether the country's atomic energy program needs a re-look. Added concerns about global warming and resultant climate change due to use of conventional fuels has added some urgency to the matter.
There is no doubt that human progress depends on the availability of cheap and abundant energy. Conventional energy sources are not only going to run out in the foreseeable future but will also be responsible for severe ecological damage with yet unknown consequences for the human race. New technologies like solar power and using hydrogen as fuel are still in a nascent stage and far from perfect.Moreover solar energy is very costly. Indeed, presently it is difficult to imagine that these would be in a position to displace conventional fuels in the foreseeable future.
Given this scenario it is but natural that nuclear energy is given a second look. Not only are raw materials and technology available, but they are available on a large enough scale to make it a sustainable alternative.It is estimated that using breeder reactors we can have plenty of energy for some billions of years.
So, what is holding the US back from pursuing a more aggressive nuclear energy program. The cost for are one. A single nuclear power plant costs several billion dollars to build. Then there is the security angle. A nuclear power plant is very vulnerabe to enemy attack and also to natural disasters.Given the rise of global terrorism this risk is magnified several times over.The consequences of a "kamikaze"type attack would be catastrophic. Finally there is the problem of dealing with "spent fuel."Reprocessing of spent fuel is discouraged by many countries in the mistaken belief that it will prevent nuclear proliferation. It is very clear now that with the dissemination of technical know how many countries are capable of building a bomb. This raises the question as to whether or not advanced nuclear powers such as the US should actively involve themselves in their peaceful nuclear nuclear programs. Not only would this ensure the use of "safe technology "but may also persuade the nations to abandon their military nuclear programs. Several nations including the US are meanwhile considering storing nuclear waste in deep underground shelters.
No matter what the present concerns might be, nuclear energy offers advantages that are difficult to overlook and it is only a matter of time before US lawmakers come out with a program to support its development.