essay topics about nuclear energy

45,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Meet top uk universities from the comfort of your home, here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.

Verification Code

An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify

Thanks for your comment !

Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.

• School Education /

Essay on Nuclear Energy in 500+ words for School Students 

• Updated on  
• Dec 30, 2023

Essay on Nuclear Energy: Nuclear energy has been fascinating and controversial since the beginning. Using atomic power to generate electricity holds the promise of huge energy supplies but we cannot overlook the concerns about safety, environmental impact, and the increase in potential weapon increase. 

The blog will help you to explore various aspects of energy seeking its history, advantages, disadvantages, and role in addressing the global energy challenge. 

Table of Contents

• 1 History Overview
• 2 Nuclear Technology 
• 3 Advantages of Nuclear Energy
• 4 Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy
• 5 Safety Measures and Regulations of Nuclear Energy
• 6 Concerns of Nuclear Proliferation
• 7 Future Prospects and Innovations of Nuclear Energy
• 8 FAQs 

Also Read: Find List of Nuclear Power Plants In India

History Overview

The roots of nuclear energy have their roots back to the early 20th century when innovative discoveries in physics laid the foundation for understanding atomic structure. In the year 1938, Otto Hahn, a German chemist and Fritz Stassman, a German physical chemist discovered nuclear fission, the splitting of atomic nuclei. This discovery opened the way for utilising the immense energy released during the process of fission. 

Also Read: What are the Different Types of Energy?

Nuclear Technology 

Nuclear power plants use controlled fission to produce heat. The heat generated is further used to produce steam, by turning the turbines connected to generators that produce electricity. This process takes place in two types of reactors: Pressurized Water Reactors (PWR) and Boiling Water Reactors (BWR). PWRs use pressurised water to transfer heat. Whereas, BWRs allow water to boil, which produces steam directly. 

Also Read: Nuclear Engineering Course: Universities and Careers

Advantages of Nuclear Energy

Let us learn about the positive aspects of nuclear energy in the following:

1. High Energy Density

Nuclear energy possesses an unparalleled energy density which means that a small amount of nuclear fuel can produce a substantial amount of electricity. This high energy density efficiency makes nuclear power reliable and powerful.

2. Low Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Unlike other traditional fossil fuels, nuclear power generation produces minimum greenhouse gas emissions during electricity generation. The low greenhouse gas emissions feature positions nuclear energy as a potential solution to weakening climate change.

3. Base Load Power

Nuclear power plants provide consistent, baseload power, continuously operating at a stable output level. This makes nuclear energy reliable for meeting the constant demand for electricity, complementing intermittent renewable sources of energy like wind and solar. 

Also Read: How to Become a Nuclear Engineer in India?

Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy

After learning the pros of nuclear energy, now let’s switch to the cons of nuclear energy.

1. Radioactive Waste

One of the most important challenges that is associated with nuclear energy is the management and disposal of radioactive waste. Nuclear power gives rise to spent fuel and other radioactive byproducts that require secure, long-term storage solutions.

2. Nuclear Accidents

The two catastrophic accidents at Chornobyl in 1986 and Fukushima in 2011 underlined the potential risks of nuclear power. These nuclear accidents can lead to severe environmental contamination, human casualties, and long-lasting negative perceptions of the technology. 

3. High Initial Costs

The construction of nuclear power plants includes substantial upfront costs. Moreover, stringent safety measures contribute to the overall expenses, which makes nuclear energy economically challenging compared to some renewable alternatives. 

Also Read: What is the IAEA Full Form?

Safety Measures and Regulations of Nuclear Energy

After recognizing the potential risks associated with nuclear energy, strict safety measures and regulations have been implemented worldwide. These safety measures include reactor design improvements, emergency preparedness, and ongoing monitoring of the plant operations. Regulatory bodies, such as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in the United States, play an important role in overseeing and enforcing safety standards. 

Also Read: What is the Full Form of AEC?

Concerns of Nuclear Proliferation

The dual-use nature of nuclear technology raises concerns about the spread of nuclear weapons. The same nuclear technology used for the peaceful generation of electricity can be diverted for military purposes. International efforts, including the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), aim to help the proliferation of nuclear weapons and promote the peaceful use of nuclear energy. 

Also Read: Dr. Homi J. Bhabha’s Education, Inventions & Discoveries

Also Read: How to Prepare for UPSC in 6 Months?

Future Prospects and Innovations of Nuclear Energy

The ongoing research and development into advanced reactor technologies are part of nuclear energy. Concepts like small modular reactors (SMRs) and Generation IV reactors aim to address safety, efficiency, and waste management concerns. Moreover, the exploration of nuclear fusion as a clean and virtually limitless energy source represents an innovation for future energy solutions. 

Nuclear energy stands at the crossroads of possibility and peril, offering the possibility of addressing the world´s growing energy needs while posing important challenges. Striking a balance between utilising the benefits of nuclear power and alleviating its risks requires ongoing technological innovation, powerful safety measures, and international cooperation. 

As we drive the complexities of perspective challenges of nuclear energy, the role of nuclear energy in the global energy mix remains a subject of ongoing debate and exploration. 

Also Read: Essay on Science and Technology for Students: 100, 200, 350 Words

Ans. Nuclear energy is the energy released during nuclear reactions. Its importance lies in generating electricity, medical applications, and powering spacecraft.

Ans. Nuclear energy is exploited from the nucleus of atoms through processes like fission or fusion. It is a powerful and controversial energy source with applications in power generation and various technologies. 

Ans. The five benefits of nuclear energy include: 1. Less greenhouse gas emissions 2. High energy density 3. Continuos power generation  4. Relatively low fuel consumption 5. Potential for reducing dependence on fossil fuels

Ans. Three important facts about nuclear energy: a. Nuclear fission releases a significant amount of energy. b. Nuclear power plants use controlled fission reactions to generate electricity. c. Nuclear fusion, combining atomic nuclei, is a potential future energy source.

Ans. Nuclear energy is considered best due to its low carbon footprint, high energy output, and potential to address energy needs. However, concerns about safety, radioactive waste, and proliferation risk are challenges that need careful consideration.

Related Articles

For more information on such interesting topics, visit our essay writing page and follow Leverage Edu.

Deepika Joshi

Deepika Joshi is an experienced content writer with educational and informative content expertise. She has hands-on experience in Education, Study Abroad and EdTech SaaS. Her strengths lie in conducting thorough research and analysis to provide accurate and up-to-date information to readers. She enjoys staying updated on new skills and knowledge, particularly in the education domain. In her free time, she loves to read articles, and blogs related to her field to expand her expertise further. In her personal life, she loves creative writing and aspires to connect with innovative people who have fresh ideas to offer.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Contact no. *

Connect With Us

45,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. take the first step today..

Resend OTP in

Need help with?

Study abroad.

UK, Canada, US & More

IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More

Scholarship, Loans & Forex

Country Preference

New Zealand

Which English test are you planning to take?

Which academic test are you planning to take.

Not Sure yet

When are you planning to take the exam?

Already booked my exam slot

Within 2 Months

Want to learn about the test

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

When do you want to start studying abroad.

January 2024

September 2024

What is your budget to study abroad?

How would you describe this article ?

Please rate this article

We would like to hear more.

Have something on your mind?

Make your study abroad dream a reality in January 2022 with

India's Biggest Virtual University Fair

Essex Direct Admission Day

Why attend .

Don't Miss Out

Home — Essay Samples — Environment — Human Impact — Nuclear Energy

Essays on Nuclear Energy

Brief description of nuclear energy, importance of writing essays on this topic, tips on choosing a good topic, essay topics, concluding thought, the pros and cons when discussing the use of nuclear energy, nuclear energy: the future of humanity's energy source, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

An Issue of Safety of Nuclear Energy

Nuclear waste: an american disaster, the history and use of nuclear energy, ernest rutherford, the father of nuclear physics, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Niels Bohr's Biography

Technetium-99m, the manhattan project - a top secret nuclear energy research program, a study on the effects of nuclear waste on the environment, get a personalized essay in under 3 hours.

Expert-written essays crafted with your exact needs in mind

Iaea Safeguards - Serving Nuclear Non-proliferation

Potential consequences of nuclear politics in south asia, the effects of fukushima daihatsu nuclear disaster, attitudes of the australian public to nuclear power, countering myths and misinformation around nuclear power, nuclear power economic: cost, comparison and waste, the role of nuclear energy in the global energy transition, the promise of nuclear energy for climate change, bridging perception and reality in nuclear energy, nuclear energy: safety, security, and ethical considerations, nuclear innovation: balancing challenges and opportunities, relevant topics.

• Deforestation
• Air Pollution
• Water Pollution
• Fast Fashion
• Plastic Bags
• Endangered Species
• Global Warming
• Climate Change

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Essays on Nuclear Energy

24/7 writing help on your phone

To install StudyMoose App tap and then “Add to Home Screen”

Nuclear Energy - Free Essay Examples and Topic Ideas

Some have even speculated that at the end of this century the demand for energy will have tripled. How is the world facing such a massive, growing demand for energy? One of the most fascinating ways is by experimenting with a clean, nearly limitless nuclear power — namely, nuclear fusion.

• 📘 Free essay examples for your ideas about Nuclear Energy
• 🏆 Best Essay Topics on Nuclear Energy
• ⚡ Simple & Nuclear Energy Easy Topics
• 🎓 Good Research Topics about Nuclear Energy
• 📖 Essay guide on Nuclear Energy
• ❓ Questions and Answers

Essay examples

Essay topic.

Save to my list

Remove from my list

• A World Without Nuclear Weapons
• Why nuclear weapons should be banned?
• Development of Nuclear Energy Industry
• Energy Sources of the Future
• Is nuclear energy safe?
• About Nuclear Weapons
• Why Nuclear Power Must Be Part of the Energy Solution?
• Fission and Fusion
• Biological Effects of Hirosima Atomic Bombing
• Nuclear Energy: a Sufficient Way of Producing Energy
• The greatest and significant texts to engineers would be
• Atomic Bomb: a Tremendous Tragedy
• Radiation in Hiroshima
• A Possibility of Usage of Nuclear Power
• The War between USA and Japan
• Nuclear Power Development
• Iaea Safeguards – Serving Nuclear Non-proliferation
• Radiation Exposure and Tohoku Earthquake in Japan
• Accelerator-Driven Subcritical System Design
• The Pros and Cons When Discussing The Use of Nuclear Energy
• The History Behind the Atomic Bomb
• Pros and Cons of Nuclear Power
• Technetium-99m
• Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
• Nuclear Power as a form of clean energy

Current Demand for Energy

Energy, especially when used to produce electricity, has become an essential part to our everyday lives. Everything from our computers to our cars to our factories rely (some more than others) on electricity and the energy used to produce it.

Some have even speculated that at the end of this century the demand for energy will have tripled. (3) How is the world facing such a massive, growing demand for energy? One of the most fascinating ways is by experimenting with a clean, nearly limitless nuclear power — namely, nuclear fusion. (2) Let us first examine the nuclear power of the present to better explore the future possibilities.

Nuclear Fission Process

The nuclear energy we use today is called nuclear fission. To create fission, particles (usually neutrons) are accelerated and slammed at high-speed into a large, heavy, unstable isotope (most nuclear reactors use 235U; other options are 233U, 239Pu, and 241Pu). The nucleus of the isotope absorbs the neutron, causing it to destabilize. As a result, the neutron splits into two smaller isotopes and two to three neutrons. The particles, called fissile, are ejected at a speed of about 20,000 kilometers per second. Fission also produces a massive amount of energy, which we use to heat water in nuclear reactors, beginning a process that results in the production of electricity. (1, 7) A little less than ten percent of the world’s electricity is generated by nuclear power plants. (2) According to LibreTexts Chemistry, “The energy released by fission is a million times greater than that released in chemical reactions”. (5) It should come as no surprise then that one kilogram of uranium can produce as much energy as four billion kilograms of coal. (4)

At first it may seem strange that so much energy can come out of something as small as the nucleus of an atom. The answer to this seemingly bizarre occurrence lies in Einstein’s famous equation E=mc2.

On November 21, 1905, Albert Einstein published one of his four Annus Mirabilis papers in the Annalen der Physik. It was titled “Does the Inertia of a Body Depend Upon Its Energy Content?,” and it was here that he introduced the equation. E=mc2, as explained in his paper, means the energy contained in an object (E) is equal to the object’s mass (m) times the velocity of light squared (c2). This implies that all mass is energy, in a super-concentrated form.

If you were to measure the mass of an isotope, conduct fission on it, and then add the masses of each component part the isotope split into after fission, you would find that the total mass of the isotope was larger before fission. Some of the mass “disappears” during fission. Or does it? As a matter of fact, the super-concentrated energy that was mass was released during and as a result of fission. The tiny amount of mass may not seem to have any correlation to the massive amount of energy produced by fission, but if we remember that the amount of energy is equal to the mass multiplied by the speed of light squared, things make far more sense. (4)

The amount of energy produced by fission is impressive, but it is also terrifying. Remember, fission is created when a heavy nucleus destabilizes and breaks apart. This is radioactive decay, and its side effects can be harmful and even deadly to humans exposed to it. This means fission, prone to causing meltdowns in the reactors (10), spews a massive amount of radioactive particles. (7) The risks have prompted scientists to experiment with the second way to achieve nuclear power: nuclear fusion.

Nuclear fusion is basically the opposite of nuclear fission. (9) Whereas fission occurs when an atom is ripped apart, fusion occurs when two small isotopes (Hydrogen-3 (known as Tritium) and Hydrogen-2 (known as Deuterium)) smash together and merge under massive amounts of pressure and temperature, producing a larger, heavier helium atom, a neutron, and an enormous amount of energy. (1, 2, 4) Interestingly enough, in fusion there is a mass defect, just like in fission — the fused mass is less than the masses of the individual nuclei. This is how fusion produces energy (remember, E = mc2). (4)

One of the best examples of nuclear fusion is in the cores of stars. Although fission does not usually occur in nature, fusion powers all stars, including the sun (4, 5). In his textbook Exploring Creation with Physical Science, Dr. Jay Wile says, “The enormous pressure in the core [of the sun] creates so much heat that the electrons in the hydrogen atoms [of which the sun is primarily composed] escape the attractive force the nucleus exerts on them. As a result, these hydrogen atoms are simply hydrogen nuclei. They are, in essence, ‘naked’ protons, having been stripped of their electrons.” (10) When the stripped hydrogen nuclei in the sun’s core collide, fusion occurs. (10)

Nuclear Fusion vs Nuclear Fission

But what makes fusion more desirable than fission? To put it in the words of Dr. Wile, “nuclear fusion is a clean, almost limitless source of energy.” (10) Fusion demonstrates cleanliness in many different ways. Like fission, fusion releases no CO2 or other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. (3) Unlike fission, fusion hardly produces any radioactive waste at all, and that which it does is quick to decay. (2) It’s major by-product is helium, which is inert and non-toxic. (3) In addition, there are no risks of a meltdown during a fusion experiment. (9)

Fusion’s near-inexhaustibility are a result of the abundance of materials needed to create it. Deuterium is distilled in all water forms and tritium is reproduced during fusion reactions that involve fusion neutrons interacting with lithium. “Terrestrial reserves of lithium would permit the operation of fusion power plants for more than 1,000 years, while sea-based reserves of lithium would fulfil needs for millions of years.” (3)

In addition to being clean and unlimited, fusion produces vastly more energy than fission. Whereas fission produces about one million times more energy than chemical reactions (such as burning coal, oil, or gas), fusion produces about four million times more energy, four times the amount produced by fusion. (3)

Naturally, the fusion research has caught the eye of many. Nations across the world have begun forming grand plans for once (and if) they get a hold of the energy fusion promises. Seoul plans to let autonomous cars loose on the streets, Germany and China plan to build all-electric Mini cars, and the U.S. wants to give their military sense-enhancing, cybernetic equipment. (8) Magnetic confinement and laser-based inertial confinement are also a possibility. (4) With all these stunning possibilities, it is little wonder that discovering how to produce sufficient fusion energy is “a scientist’s dream!” (10)

However, as is the case with many dreams, reality can hold a more pessimistic view on things. Progress is slow when it comes to fusion, as it is very difficult to harness the same forces that drive the sun. (4) Let’s examine a quote from ZME Science’s article, What’s the difference between nuclear fission and fusion, by Tibi Puiu: “Normally light atoms such as hydrogen or helium don’t fuse spontaneously because the charge of their nuclei cause them to repel each other. Inside hot stars such as the sun, however, extremely high temperature and pressure rip the atoms to their constituting protons, electrons, and neutrons. Inside the core, the pressure is millions of times higher than the surface of the Earth, and the temperature reaches more than 15 million Kelvin. These conditions remain stable because the core witnesses a never-ending tug of war of expansion-contraction between the self-gravity of the sun and the thermal pressure generated by fusion in the core.” (4)

So in order to make use of fusion, scientist’s have to recreate the extreme conditions of the stars on Earth. (2) The challenges of understanding how to control a fusion reaction in a contained space has prevented any large strides of progress. (1) In the sun, fusion occurs naturally at around 15 million degrees Celsius, but in order too replicate the sun’s core on earth, six times the amount (about 100,000,000 degrees Celsius) is required to make up for the lack of immense pressure that is impossible to produce on earth. (4, 9)

However, this does not mean that technicalities prevent any progress. Fusion has been created, but as of yet all of these reactions have consumed more energy than they produce. (2, 4) Despite all this, scientists all over the world continue to pour effort into achieving fusion at a reasonable energy exchange. There are two ways scientists have approached the creation of fusion: tokamak reactors and laser fusion. ABC’s article, Fusion vs. fission: clean, green nuclear energy technologies explained, by Stuart Gary explains how the tokamak reactor works: “Tokamak reactors use a doughnut-shaped ring to house heavy and super-heavy isotopes of hydrogen, known as deuterium and tritium… These isotopes are heated to 100 million degrees Celsius by powerful electric currents within the ring. At these extreme temperatures electrons are ripped off their atoms, forming a charged plasma of hydrogen ions. Magnets confine the charged plasma to an extremely small area within the ring, maximising the chance that the superheated ions will fuse together and give off energy. The heat generated can be used to turn water into steam that spins turbines, producing electricity.” (2)

There are about two hundred tokamaks worldwide. One of the most important fusion projects is the ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor), a “joint fusion experiment” in Southern France designed to produce ten times the energy it takes to run. The first fusion experiments with the ITER are scheduled for some time from 2025-2027. (2, 4)

Germany, China, and the UK each have their own reactors as well. Germany’s tokamak, the Wendelstein 7-X, is a different type of tokamak, called a stellarator. The stellarator design included complicated twists to increase stability and control the plasma for longer. As a matter of fact, it was the Wendelstein 7-X that proved the stellarator design correct, working as expected (though still inefficiently) when it was first turned on in 2016. (2, 4)

As of yet, China has claimed to reach tokamak temperatures of 50 million Celsius (three times hotter). Their tokamak is named the Experimental Advanced Superconducting Tokamak (EAST). (2)

“The United States, on the other hand, wants to significantly revamp the classical fusion reactor. Physicists at the Department of Energy’s Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) are proposing a more efficient shape that employs spherical tokamaks, more akin to a cored apple. The team writes that this spherical design halves the size of the hole in the doughnut, meaning we can use much lower energy magnetic fields to keep the plasma in place.” (4)

Fusion Projects and Obstacles

Laser fusion is the alternative method to achieving fusion. ABC’s previously mentioned article provides a description for this process as well: “Laser fusion uses ultra-short bursts of very powerful lasers to generate the extreme temperatures and pressures needed to trigger a fusion reaction. These laser pulses can heat and compress hydrogen isotopes to a fraction of their size, forcing them to fuse into helium and release high-energy neutrons.” The Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s National Ignition Facility in California uses laser pulses that release more than two million joules of energy in one nanosecond (one thousandth of a second). The one downside to laser fusion is that it is more likely for it to become radioactive. (2)

But the path to the fusion dream is hindered by yet another technicality, one that could be more challenging than the science involved with actually figuring fusion out. According to Steve Crowley, director of Culham Centre for Fusion Energy, “[fusion is] expensive research that can only be done at large scales… and nobody sees the need right now. Every time there’s talk about climate change funding goes up for awhile [but it’s not enough to even get the first reactors built]… For $20 billion in cash, I could build you a working reactor. It would be big, and maybe not very reliable… 25 years ago we didn’t even know if we’d be able to make fusion work. Now, the only question is whether we’ll be able to make it affordable.” Evidently, much more time and effort is required for sizeable progress to be made with fusion. (9)

Troubles with Cold Fusion

Perhaps the biggest reason why many people have been skeptical about fusion and don’t “see the need right now,” is because of the “cold fusion” fiasco of 1989. In BBVA OpenMind’s article Cold Fusion: Anatomy of a Scientific ‘Fraud’, Javier Yanes writes, “Nowadays if we speak to anyone without a strong scientific background about nuclear fusion as the energy of the future, they may respond with some vague reference to cold fusion,” and, “the cold fusion fiasco of 23 March 1989 has lived on almost like a cultural meme, overshadowing its legitimate nemesis, hot fusion.” (6) But what is this all about? What even is cold fusion? Why does it seem to dissuade the interests of so many, despite the tempting promises of clean, limitless, and powerful energy? An brief look into what happened may help explain much of the criticism fusion faces today.

“In the 1920s, some scientists speculated that palladium’s ability to absorb hydrogen opened up the possibility of using this metal as a catalyst that would bring atomic nuclei close enough together to achieve fusion at room temperature.” (6) This was the first idea for “cold fusion” (and now you can see where it gets its name). The idea was dismissed relatively quickly, however, and no one attempted any experiments until, in the beginning of the 1980s, electrochemist Martin Fleischmann from the University of Southampton (in the UK) rediscovered the idea. Fleischmann shared his discovery secretively with his friend and colleague Stanley Pons from the University of Utah (in the USA). Fleischmann and Pons each spent $100,000 of their own money on secretly researching cold fusion. The two worked on their cold fusion device from 1983 to 1988 and then, wanting to confirm their discovery with new experiments, asked the US Department of Energy for help with their project. The Department sent Steven Jones from Brigham Young University to help Fleischmann and Pons with the assessment of their project. Jones had been working on his own cold fusion experiments — experiments that, besides consuming more energy than they produced, had worked. (6)

Jones, Fleischmann, and Pons all agreed to send their assessment results simultaneously to the journal Nature on March 24, 1989. However, responding to pressure from the University of Utah, Fleischmann and Pons sent their results on March 23, 1989, the day before they were supposed to, by means of a statement and press conference. (6) Their announcement “shocked the world” (10) and the University of Utah threw their support behind Fleischmann and Pons. The scientific community, however, reacted with great skepticism. Almost all of the scientists that recreated Fleischmann and Pons’ experiment, including institutions investigating hot fusion such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, came to the same conclusion: the experiment did not work, and the results in the original experiment were caused by experimental error, not fusion. Fleischmann and Pons exiled themselves in Southern France to continue their experiments with private funding. (6, 10) There have been a large number of suspicions that Fleischmann and Pons’ announcement was a fraud, and others have accused the scientific community’s conclusions to be the same. However, no one knows for sure — there are many variables that could effect the results of a cold fusion experiment. Regardless, “cold fusion persists as one of the most cited examples of failed science.” (6)

Furure of Nuclear Energy

There should be little wonder, then, that funding today’s “hot fusion” experiments can be difficult. Instead, if people take any interest in funding nuclear research, they are more likely to consider supporting another way to generate cleaner nuclear power. People all over the world are also researching a cleaner method of producing fission. (2)

This method, first used in the 1950s, is sometimes referred to as the “thorium wildcard,” as the main idea behind this form of fission is to use thorium instead of uranium, which may be much cleaner. Thorium is also three times more abundant than uranium, the largest reserve being in Australia. So far, the United States, India, Israel, the Uk, China, Norway, Chile, and Indonesia are looking into the use of thorium fission. (2) At the very least, the thorium wildcard could provide cleaner energy until we eventually manage to master fusion.

Will we ever obtain fusion? Will it remain one of the world’s greatest mysteries for all eternity? Or, like with the lightbulb and computer, will we eventually find a way through trial and error and usher in colossal changes to the world? It is hard to predict when fusion will pay off for all the time, effort, and money poured into it over the past decade. It does, however, seem very possible for fusion to make its impact in the coming decades. In the words of Tibi Puiu, “when we do get our own sun in a jar… be ready [to] embrace the unexpected, for nothing will ever be the same again.” (4)

Bibliography

• Fission vs. Fusion – What’s the Difference?. Online. 20 January 2020.
• Fusion vs. fission: clean, green nuclear energy. Online 20 January 2020.
• Advantages of Fusion. Online. 20 January 2020.
• What’s the difference between nuclear fission and fusion. Online. 20 January 2020.
• Source 5 – Contrasting Nuclear Fission and Nuclear Fusion. Online. 20 January 2020.
• Cold Fusion: Anatomy of a Scientific ‘Fraud’. Online. 20 January 2020.
• Harnessing nuclear energy. Online. 23 January 2020.
• China’s experimental nuclear fusion reactor to go live in 2020. Online. 15 February 2020.
• Why Don’t We Have Fusion Power?. Online. 7 March 2020.
• Wile, Dr. Jay L. (2007). Exploring Creation with Physical Science. Anderson, IN: Apologia Educational Ministries, Inc.

FAQ about Nuclear Energy

👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!

Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.

IELTS Mentor "IELTS Preparation & Sample Answer"

• Skip to content
• Jump to main navigation and login

Nav view search

• IELTS Sample

IELTS Writing Task 2/ Essay Topics with sample answer.

Ielts essay sample 36 - the threat of nuclear weapons maintains world peace, ielts writing task 2/ ielts essay:, the threat of nuclear weapons maintains world peace. nuclear power provides cheap and clean energy. the benefits of nuclear technology far outweigh the disadvantages..

• IELTS Essay

IELTS Materials

• IELTS Bar Graph
• IELTS Line Graph
• IELTS Table Chart
• IELTS Flow Chart
• IELTS Pie Chart
• IELTS Letter Writing
• Academic Reading

Useful Links

• IELTS Secrets
• Band Score Calculator
• Exam Specific Tips
• Useful Websites
• IELTS Preparation Tips
• Academic Reading Tips
• Academic Writing Tips
• GT Writing Tips
• Listening Tips
• Speaking Tips
• IELTS Grammar Review
• IELTS Vocabulary
• IELTS Cue Cards
• IELTS Life Skills
• Letter Types

• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Copyright Notice
• HTML Sitemap

Chemistry Nuclear Energy

What is the essence of matter? What is the mechanism for the interaction and formation of the different substances by atoms? These are some of the basic questions that have occupied many scientists, philosophers and others for centuries. Atomic theory is the scientific explanation of the atoms and matter. It developed from the ancient Greek concept of indivisible points to today’s quantum mechanical principle. In this way, various discoveries and experiments have played their part in developing atomic theory and its application, for example, nuclear energy. In this essay, the paper will introduce some of the major individuals and events in the history of atomic theory, as well as the pros and cons of nuclear energy.

Atomic theory is an accurate scientific description of the atoms and materials. It has transformed from the ancient Greek concept of indivisible corpuscles into a contemporary quantum mechanical model. One of the key figures and milestones in the development of atomic theory is John Dalton (1766- 1844). It was the first modern atomic theory proposed in 1807 based on his experiments, consistent with the laws of conservation of matter, definite and multiple proportions. As he said, matter is made up of small indivisible atoms that are from different elements which combine in fixed proportions to give rise to compounds(Thackray)

J.J. Thomson (1856-1940): He found the electron in 1897 by observing the bending of cathode rays when exposed to a magnet (Smith). He suggested the plum pudding model of an atom in which electrons are inside a positively charged sphere (Smith). Ernest Rutherford (1871-1937): In 1970, he did the renowned gold foil experiment, which proved that most of an atom’s mass and positive charge is contained in a small nucleus enveloped by a cloud of electrons (McCormmach). He also found the proton and the radioactivity (McCormmach). Niels Bohr (1885-1962): In 1913, he suggested the Bohr model of the electrons that threw light on emission and absorption spectra for the hydrogen atoms. He proposed that electrons revolve about the nucleus in discrete turn levels and can leap from one stage to another through the emission or absorption of photons (Falconer). Erwin Schrödinger (1887-1961) wrote the wave equation for an electron in 1926 when quantum mechanics began (Falconer). He proved the electron to be in a wave-like behaviour and has a probability distribution around its nucleus rather than being fixed (Brown, Priest).

Nuclear energy is splitting nuclei resulting from fusion reactions, also known as atomic fission (Tollefson). It can be used as a good power source but has environmental and safety concerns. Among the historical discoveries that have contributed to our knowledge about atoms is radioactivity, which was discovered in the late 19th and early20 20th century by Henri Becquerel, Marie Curie and Pierre Curier. Some elements, including uranium and radium, can even radiate into other components (Tollefson). This resulted in the understanding that atoms are not unitary but consist of smaller units, such as protons, neutrons, and electrons.

It starts with the positive sides before proceeding to the negatives: nuclear energy is a carbon-free, reliable and high-voltage source of electricity. In contrast to fossil fuels, it does not emit any greenhouse gases or air pollutants during its operation. It has a modest land footprint compared to other renewable energy sources like wind and solar. As a baseload power for the electric grid, it does not need weather and daylight as the preconditions (Arefin et al.). In turn, the cons are due to nuclear energy being technically a nonrenewable energy source since uranium used as the primary fuel for its production is limited and needs mining, in which case processing can be included (Arefin et al.). Second, nuclear energy has an impressive initial cost due to the construction and maintenance of the atomic power stations as well as producing radioactive waste that is harmful and difficult for safe elimination, in addition to running the risk of a catastrophic scenario if any accidents, malfunctions or terrorist attacks occur (Arefin et al.).

The Chornobyl disaster (Aitsi-Selmi and Murray, 1986), also considered the worst nuclear accident in history, occurred at the Chornobyl Nuclear Power Plant located in Ukraine, which was then a part of the USSR. Still, several explosions and fires hit reactor number four, exploding large quantities of radioactive material into the air. The disaster killed almost 400,0 people and affected tens of millions in Europe (Aitsi-SelmiMurray). Even today, the zone around the plant is very polluted enough to be uninhabitable.

The Fukushima disaster (2011) is the second worst nuclear accident in history that happened at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan after a 9.0 log earthquake. Tsunami is mentioned as number two concerning magnitude, only surpassed by the Chornobyl disaster, which triggered an explosive release of long-lived; the natural disasters destroyed the cooling systems and backup generators of the plant, which began The accident contaminated the air and, water and soil with so much radiation that hundreds of thousands were evacuated. Decontamination and plant dismantling have continued for decades (Watt).

The last is the Three Mile Island accident (1979), also known as one of the most severe cases in US history, which took place at Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station in Pennsylvania by Oe et al. In the case of a partial meltdown in one reactor, this was caused by several failures throughout secondary systems and some human mistakes. Both accidents released a small amount of radioactive gas into the environment, but it did not result in any fatalities or significant health effects. The occurrence made many people sensitive and anxious about nuclear power safety (Oe et al.)

To conclude, atomic theory is an incredible scientific accomplishment influencing how we understand the physical world and its manifestations. Since Dalton to Schrödinger, many scientists have helped build up and use atomic theory like nuclear energy. But nuclear power also presents very significant threats and hazards: pollution of the environment, radioactive waste as well as atomic accidents. Thus, using nuclear energy responsibly and fairly while researching alternative energy sources for a sustainable future is very important.

Works Cited

Aitsi-Selmi, Amina, and Virginia Murray. “The Chernobyl Disaster and Beyond: Implications of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030.”  PLOS Medicine , vol. 13, no. 4, Apr. 2016, p. e1002017, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002017.

Arefin, Md Arman, et al. “A Comprehensive Review of Nuclear-Renewable Hybrid Energy Systems: Status, Operation, Configuration, Benefit, and Feasibility.”  Frontiers in Sustainable Cities , vol. 3, Sept. 2021, https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2021.723910.

Brown, M. Bryson, and Graham Priest. “Chunk and Permeate II: Bohr’s Hydrogen Atom.”  European Journal for Philosophy of Science , vol. 5, no. 3, Jan. 2015, pp. 297–314, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-014-0104-7.

Falconer, Isobel. “Corpuscles, Electrons and Cathode Rays: J.J. Thomson and the ‘Discovery of the Electron.’”  The British Journal for the History of Science , vol. 20, no. 3, July 1987, pp. 241–76, https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007087400023955.

McCormmach, Russell.  J. J. Thomson and the Structure of Light . No. 4, Dec. 1967, pp. 362–87, https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007087400002922. Accessed 15 May 2023.

Oe, Misari, et al. “Mental Health Consequences of the Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima Nuclear Disasters: A Scoping Review.”  International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , vol. 18, no. 14, July 2021, p. 7478, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18147478.

Smith, George E. “J. J. Thomson and the Electron: 1897?1899 an Introduction.”  The Chemical Educator , vol. 2, no. 6, Dec. 1997, pp. 1–42, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00897970149a. Accessed 6 Dec. 2021.

Thackray, Arnold W. “The Emergence of Dalton’s Chemical Atomic Theory: 1801-08.”  The British Journal for the History of Science , vol. 3, no. 1, June 1966, pp. 1–23, https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007087400000169. Accessed 4 May 2020.

Tollefson, Jeff. “Nuclear-Fusion Breakthrough: This Physicist Helped to Achieve the First-Ever Energy Gain.”  Nature , vol. 624, no. 7992, Dec. 2023, pp. 500–1, https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-03923-5.

Watt, Lori. “ Making Japanese Citizens: Civil Society and the Mythology of The  Shimin  in Postwar Japan  (Review).”  The Journal of Japanese Studies , vol. 39, no. 1, 2013, pp. 172–75, https://doi.org/10.1353/jjs.2013.0000. Accessed 13 Sept. 2020.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Related Essays

Dangers of cheerleading, topic search strategy paper, artificial intelligence (ai) in nursing, why color blindness is more common in men than women, the importance of management in the hospital literature review, understanding scotomas: causes, effects, and healthcare interventions for visual impairments, popular essay topics.

• American Dream
• Artificial Intelligence
• Black Lives Matter
• Bullying Essay
• Career Goals Essay
• Causes of the Civil War
• Child Abusing
• Civil Rights Movement
• Community Service
• Cultural Identity
• Cyber Bullying
• Death Penalty
• Depression Essay
• Domestic Violence
• Freedom of Speech
• Global Warming
• Gun Control
• Human Trafficking
• I Believe Essay
• Immigration
• Importance of Education
• Israel and Palestine Conflict
• Leadership Essay
• Legalizing Marijuanas
• Mental Health
• National Honor Society
• Police Brutality
• Pollution Essay
• Racism Essay
• Romeo and Juliet
• Same Sex Marriages
• Social Media
• The Great Gatsby
• The Yellow Wallpaper
• Time Management
• To Kill a Mockingbird
• Violent Video Games
• What Makes You Unique
• Why I Want to Be a Nurse
• Send us an e-mail

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

Majority of Americans support more nuclear power in the country

A majority of U.S. adults remain supportive of expanding nuclear power in the country, according to  a Pew Research Center survey from May . Overall, 56% say they favor more nuclear power plants to generate electricity. This share is statistically unchanged from last year.

But the future of large-scale nuclear power in America is uncertain. While Congress recently passed a bipartisan act intended to ease the nuclear energy industry’s financial and regulatory challenges, reactor shutdowns continue to gradually outpace new construction.

Americans remain more likely to favor expanding solar power (78%) and wind power (72%) than nuclear power. Yet while support for solar and wind power has declined by double digits since 2020 – largely driven by drops in Republican support – the share who favor nuclear power has grown by 13 percentage points over that span.

When asked about the federal government’s role in encouraging the production of nuclear energy, Americans are somewhat split. On balance, more say the government should encourage (41%) than discourage (22%) this. But 36% say the government should not exert influence either way, according to a March 2023 Center survey .

To measure public attitudes toward the use of nuclear power in the United States, we analyzed data from Pew Research Center surveys. Most of the data comes from our survey of 8,638 U.S. adults conducted May 13-19, 2024.

Everyone who took part in the survey is a member of the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses. This way, nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories. Read more about the  ATP’s methodology .

Here are the survey  questions used for this analysis , along with responses, and its  methodology .

Links to related Center surveys, including their questions and methodologies, can be found throughout the post.

In addition, we tracked the number of U.S. nuclear power reactors over time by analyzing data from the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA)  Power Reactor Information System . The IAEA classifies a reactor as “operational” from the date of its first electrical grid connection to the date of its permanent shutdown. Reactors that face temporary outages are still categorized as operational. Annual totals exclude reactors that closed that year.

Views by gender

Attitudes on nuclear power production have long differed by gender.

In the May survey, men remain far more likely than women to favor more nuclear power plants to generate electricity in the United States (70% vs. 44%). This pattern holds true among adults in both political parties.

Views on nuclear energy differ by gender globally, too, according to a Center survey conducted from fall 2019 to spring 2020 . In 18 of the 20 places surveyed around the world (including the U.S.), men were more likely than women to favor using more nuclear power as a source of domestic energy.

Views by party

Republicans are more likely than Democrats to favor expanding nuclear power to generate electricity in the U.S. Two-thirds of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say they support this, compared with about half of Democrats and Democratic leaners.

Republicans have supported nuclear power in greater shares than Democrats each time this question has been asked since 2016.

The partisan gap in support for nuclear power (18 points) is smaller than those for other types of energy, including fossil fuel sources such as coal mining (48 points) and offshore oil and gas drilling (47 points).

Still, Americans in both parties now see nuclear power more positively than they did earlier this decade. While Democrats remain divided on the topic (49% support, 49% oppose), the share who favor expanding the energy source is up 12 points since 2020. Republican support has grown by 14 points over this period.

While younger Republicans generally tend to be more supportive of increasing domestic renewable energy sources than their older peers, the pattern reverses when it comes to nuclear energy. For example, Republicans under 30 are much more likely than those ages 65 and older to favor more solar panel farms in the U.S. (80% vs. 54%); there’s a similar gap over expanding wind power. But when it comes to expanding nuclear power, Republicans under 30 are 11 points less likely than the oldest Republicans to express support (61% vs. 72%).

A look at U.S. nuclear power reactors

The U.S. currently has 94 nuclear power reactors, including one that just began operating in Georgia this spring. Reactors collectively generated  18.6% of all U.S. electricity in 2023 , according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

About half of the United States’ nuclear power reactors (48) are in the South, while nearly a quarter (22) are in the Midwest. There are 18 reactors in the Northeast and six in the West, according to data from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

The number of U.S. reactors has steadily fallen since peaking at 111 in 1990. Nine Mile Point-1, located in Scriba, New York, is the oldest U.S. nuclear power reactor still in operation. It first connected to the power grid in November 1969. Most of the 94 current reactors began operations in the 1970s (41) or 1980s (44), according to IAEA data. (The IAEA classifies reactors as “operational” from their first electrical grid connection to their date of permanent shutdown.)

Within the last decade, just three new reactors joined the power fleet. Three times as many shut down over the same timespan.

One of the many reasons nuclear power projects have dwindled in recent decades may be the perceived dangers following  nuclear accidents  in the U.S. and abroad. For example, the 2011  Fukushima Daiichi accident  led the Japanese government to greatly decrease its reliance on nuclear power and prompted other countries to  rethink their nuclear energy plans . High construction costs and radioactive waste storage issues are also oft-cited hurdles to nuclear energy advancement.

Still, many advocates say that nuclear power is key to reducing emissions from electricity generation. There’s been a recent flurry of interest in reviving decommissioned nuclear power sites, including the infamous Three Mile Island plant and the Palisades plant , the latter of which shuttered in 2022. Last year, California announced it would delay the retirement of its one remaining nuclear power plant until 2030. And just this summer, construction began on a new plant in Wyoming. It’s set to house an advanced sodium-cooled fast reactor, pending approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission .

Note: Here are the  questions used for the analysis , along with responses, and its  methodology . This is an update of a post first published March 23, 2022.

• Climate, Energy & Environment
• Partisanship & Issues
• Political Issues

Rebecca Leppert is a copy editor at Pew Research Center .

Brian Kennedy is a senior researcher focusing on science and society research at Pew Research Center .

Americans’ Extreme Weather Policy Views and Personal Experiences

U.s. adults under 30 have different foreign policy priorities than older adults, about 3 in 10 americans would seriously consider buying an electric vehicle, how americans view national, local and personal energy choices, electric vehicle charging infrastructure in the u.s., most popular.

901 E St. NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20004 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

© 2024 Pew Research Center

• Mobile Site
• Staff Directory
• Advertise with Ars

Filter by topic

• Biz & IT
• Gaming & Culture

Front page layout

Don't hold the mayo —

Pass the mayo: condiment could help improve fusion energy yields, controlling a problematic instability could lead to cheaper internal fusion..

Jennifer Ouellette - Aug 9, 2024 8:48 pm UTC

Inertial confinement fusion is one method for generating energy through nuclear fusion, albeit one plagued by all manner of scientific challenges (although progress is being made ). Researchers at LeHigh University are attempting to overcome one specific bugbear with this approach by conducting experiments with mayonnaise placed in a rotating figure-eight contraption. They described their most recent findings in a new paper published in the journal Physical Review E with an eye toward increasing energy yields from fusion.

The work builds on prior research in the LeHigh laboratory of mechanical engineer Arindam Banerjee, who focuses on investigating the dynamics of fluids and other materials in response to extremely high acceleration and centrifugal force. In this case, his team was exploring what's known as the "instability threshold" of elastic/plastic materials. Scientists have debated whether this comes about because of initial conditions, or whether it's the result of "more local catastrophic processes," according to Banerjee. The question is relevant to a variety of fields, including geophysics, astrophysics, explosive welding, and yes, inertial confinement fusion.

How exactly does inertial confinement fusion work? As Chris Lee explained for Ars back in 2016:

The idea behind inertial confinement fusion is simple. To get two atoms to fuse together, you need to bring their nuclei into contact with each other. Both nuclei are positively charged, so they repel each other, which means that force is needed to convince two hydrogen nuclei to touch. In a hydrogen bomb, force is generated when a small fission bomb explodes, compressing a core of hydrogen. This fuses to create heavier elements, releasing a huge amount of energy. Being killjoys, scientists prefer not to detonate nuclear weapons every time they want to study fusion or use it to generate electricity. Which brings us to inertial confinement fusion. In inertial confinement fusion, the hydrogen core consists of a spherical pellet of hydrogen ice inside a heavy metal casing. The casing is illuminated by powerful lasers, which burn off a large portion of the material. The reaction force from the vaporized material exploding outward causes the remaining shell to implode. The resulting shockwave compresses the center of the core of the hydrogen pellet so that it begins to fuse. If confinement fusion ended there, the amount of energy released would be tiny. But the energy released due to the initial fusion burn in the center generates enough heat for the hydrogen on the outside of the pellet to reach the required temperature and pressure. So, in the end (at least in computer models), all of the hydrogen is consumed in a fiery death, and massive quantities of energy are released.

That's the idea anyway. The problem is that hydrodynamic instabilities tend to form in the plasma state—Banerjee likens it to "two materials [that] penetrate one another like fingers" in the presence of gravity or any accelerating field—which in turn reduces energy yields. The technical term is a Rayleigh-Taylor instability, which occurs between two materials of different densities, where the density and pressure gradients move in opposite directions. Mayonnaise turns out to be an excellent analog for investigating this instability in accelerated solids, with no need for a lab setup with high temperature and pressure conditions, because it's a non-Newtonian fluid.

“We use mayonnaise because it behaves like a solid, but when subjected to a pressure gradient, it starts to flow,” said Banerjee . “As with a traditional molten metal, if you put a stress on mayonnaise, it will start to deform, but if you remove the stress, it goes back to its original shape. So there’s an elastic phase followed by a stable plastic phase. The next phase is when it starts flowing, and that’s where the instability kicks in."

More mayo, please

His team's 2019 experiments involved pouring Hellman's Real Mayonnaise—no Miracle Whip for this crew—into a Plexiglass container and then creating wavelike perturbations in the mayo. One experiment involved placing the container on a rotating wheel in the shape of a figure eight and tracking the material with a high-speed camera, using an image processing algorithm to analyze the footage. Their results supported the claim that the instability threshold is dependent on initial conditions, namely amplitude and wavelength.

This latest paper sheds more light on the structural integrity of fusion capsules used in inertial confinement fusion, taking a closer look at the material properties, the amplitude and wavelength conditions, and the acceleration rate of such materials as they hit the Rayleigh-Taylor instability threshold. The more scientists know about the phase transition from the elastic to the stable phase, the better they can control the conditions and maintain either an elastic or plastic phase, avoiding the instability. Banerjee et al. were able to identify the conditions to maintain the elastic phase, which could inform the design of future pellets for inertial confinement fusion.

That said, the mayonnaise experiments are an analog, orders of magnitude away from the real-world conditions of nuclear fusion, which Banerjee readily acknowledges. He is nonetheless hopeful that future research will improve the predictability of just what happens within the pellets in their high-temperature, high-pressure environments. "We’re another cog in this giant wheel of researchers,” he said . “And we’re all working towards making inertial fusion cheaper and therefore, attainable.”

DOI: Physical Review E, 2024. 10.1103/PhysRevE.109.055103 ( About DOIs ).

reader comments

Channel ars technica.

Nuclear fusion game-changer: New method can cut reactor design time by decade

The team replaced a portion of the traditional thermal hydraulic and neutronics simulations with a trained machine learning model..

Aman Tripathi

Researchers noted that developing a nuclear reactor in the US currently takes approximately 25 years.

Enrico Sacchetti

Researchers at Brigham Young University (BYU) have demonstrated a way to cut nuclear reactor development time by a decade or more.

Currently, the designing and licensing processes for modern nuclear reactors take a long time. Licensing a new nuclear reactor design in the United States can take around 20 years and cost about $1 billion.

Besides, the construction of a modern nuclear reactor can take an additional five years and billions of dollars more after the licensing process. So, it takes roughly 25 years to develop a nuclear reactor in the US, as highlighted by the researchers.

The research team, led by professor Matthew Memmott, wants to reduce the duration and cost involved in bringing new nuclear plants online with the help of artificial intelligence (AI).

The team has demonstrated how AI can be utilized to accelerate the design and licensing processes for modern nuclear reactors.

“The idea is to shorten it, make it safer, cheaper and faster to get the nuclear power, rather than take 20 years to get the license,” the professor stated.

Rising demand for nuclear fusion

As the demand for energy and sustainability has grown ballistically, scientists across the world are working on renewable energy sources.

In this quest, nuclear fusion has emerged as the most desired option. This process, which powers the sun, is considered a key to generating limitless, clean energy on the Earth.

Therefore, both government and private organizations and institutions across the world are trying to build nuclear reactors that could successfully execute the fusion process.

“Our demand for electricity is going to skyrocket in years to come and we need to figure out how to produce additional power quickly,” Memmott said in the press release.

“The only baseload power we can make in the Gigawatt quantities needed that is completely emissions free is nuclear power.”

Complexity of nuclear reactor design

The complexity and time-consuming nature of nuclear reactor design stem from the multi-scale nature of the process.

It involves everything from neutrons on the quantum scale to macro-scale coolant flow and heat transfer. Multiple layers of physics are also tightly interconnected, which further complicates the design process.

Memmott explained these issues by citing his personal experience.

“When I worked at Westinghouse, it took a team of neutron specialists six months just to run one complete-core multi-physics model. And if they made a mistake two months in, they’d wasted two months of valuable computational time and would have to start over.”

The new research demonstrates how AI can alleviate this time burden. The team replaced a portion of the required thermal hydraulic and neutronics simulations with a trained machine learning model.

This model predicts temperature profiles based on variable geometric reactor parameters. These parameters are then optimized to create an optimal nuclear reactor design at a fraction of the computational cost of traditional methods.

Testing and validation

Interestingly, the researchers built and tested a dozen machine learning algorithms, identifying the top three and refining them until they found one that performed exceptionally well on a preliminary data set.

Their findings, published in the journal Nuclear Engineering and Design, show that their refined model can geometrically optimize design elements significantly faster than traditional methods.

For instance, the team tested their idea by using their AI algorithm to try and replicate a shield designed by a local nuclear company. Remarkably, the algorithm produced a near-perfect match of the company’s shield in just two days.

RECOMMENDED ARTICLES

“This is amazing because within a couple of days we were able to do the same work that it took a team of engineers six months to do,” expressed the researcher.

This breakthrough could pave the way for a faster and more cost-effective expansion of nuclear power.

The Blueprint Daily

Stay up-to-date on engineering, tech, space, and science news with The Blueprint.

By clicking sign up, you confirm that you accept this site's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

ABOUT THE EDITOR

Aman Tripathi An active and versatile journalist and news editor. He has covered regular and breaking news for several leading publications and news media, including The Hindu, Economic Times, Tomorrow Makers, and many more. Aman holds expertise in politics, travel, and tech news, especially in AI, advanced algorithms, and blockchain, with a strong curiosity about all things that fall under science and tech.

POPULAR ARTICLES

China’s dielectric wafers made of artificial sapphire could extend battery life, us to have world’s tallest timber skyscraper with 55 floors, 600 feet height, cern’s breakthrough experiment captures high-energy neutrinos for first time, used ev batteries find new life, turned into powerful energy storage system, related articles.

Breakthrough low-power 2D chips can enhance smartphone battery life

• transportation

China: Biggest cargo drone carries over 1.5 tons in 1st test flight

South Korea: Hyundai 1st to reveal EV battery makers’ list, Kia to follow

135-million-year-old crocodile unveils secrets of dinosaur-dominated seas

• Work & Careers
• Life & Arts

UK nuclear waste site failed to heed warnings over cyber risks, court told

To read this article for free, register now.

Once registered, you can: • Read free articles • Get our Editor's Digest and other newsletters • Follow topics and set up personalised events • Access Alphaville: our popular markets and finance blog

Explore more offers.

Then $75 per month. Complete digital access to quality FT journalism. Cancel anytime during your trial.

FT Digital Edition

Today's FT newspaper for easy reading on any device. This does not include ft.com or FT App access.

• Global news & analysis
• Expert opinion

Standard Digital

Essential digital access to quality FT journalism on any device. Pay a year upfront and save 20%.

• FT App on Android & iOS
• FT Edit app
• FirstFT: the day's biggest stories
• 20+ curated newsletters
• Follow topics & set alerts with myFT
• FT Videos & Podcasts

Terms & Conditions apply

Explore our full range of subscriptions.

Why the ft.

See why over a million readers pay to read the Financial Times.

Our Privacy and Cookies Policy

We use cookies to provide the best experience for you. To find out more check our cookies and privacy policy

Third nuclear power plant proposal lodged in Norway

08 August 2024

Norsk Kjernekraft has submitted a proposal to Norway's Ministry of Energy for an assessment of the construction of a power plant based on multiple small modular reactors (SMRs) in the municipality of Øygarden, west of Bergen.

"With this, the first step in the formal process to establish a nuclear power plant in Øygarden has been initiated," the company said.

The proposed location is an area of up to 250 acres (101 hectares) at Buneset, 600 metres south of the transformer and the gas processing plant at Kollsnes. The location is said to be well suited for utilising existing and planned network infrastructure in the Bergen area. The power plant will enable the electrification of oil and gas installations, the establishment of new industry and safeguarding security of supply.

The site is owned by landowner and former mayor of Øygarden, Rolv Svein Rougnø. Rougnø earlier entered into a letter of intent with Norsk Kjernekraft and the agreement outlines that the site can be acquired for use in the construction of SMR power plants.

Norsk Kjernekraft said the site has space for five SMRs, each with a generating capacity of 300 MWe. This means that the site has the potential for generating 12.5 TWh per year, corresponding to almost 10% of Norway's current total electricity consumption.

The scope of the proposed study programme submitted to the Ministry of Energy is limited to assessing what effects construction, operation and decommissioning of the power plant can have for society and the environment.

The report describes the location in question and explains how the nuclear power plant will contribute to fulfilling local, regional and national ambitions and obligations in the field of energy and climate. In addition, local conditions for the construction and operation of a nuclear power plant at Buneset in Øygarden are described, and which topics will be described in a future impact assessment.

The ministry will send the report out for consultation, and then the municipality, residents and industry will be able to make their comments. If approved by the ministry, the report and input will form the basis for an impact assessment.

Norsk Kjernekraft noted that Vestland county, in which Øygarden is located, is the region in Norway with the highest greenhouse gas emissions. Large projects are planned for new power consumption in the county, among other things to electrify oil and gas installations. Øygarden municipality already has a large power deficit, and this will increase as a result of planned electrification projects and the establishment of new industry.

"This marks yet another important milestone for Norsk Kjernekraft, and it is the third notification sent to the Ministry of Energy," said the company's CEO Jonny Hesthammer. "Previous notifications have included Aure and Heim municipalities, as well as Vardø municipality. A nuclear power plant in Øygarden will make it possible to electrify oil and gas installations on land and offshore. In addition, it will enable new power-intensive industry, and improve the utilisation of the power grid in Western Norway.

"The power plant will produce electricity regardless of the weather, thereby improving security of supply throughout the country. This report will also be an important part of the knowledge base for the government's announced investigation into nuclear power in Norway."

In June, the Norwegian government announced the appointment of a committee to conduct a broad review and assessment of various aspects of a possible future establishment of nuclear power in the country. It must deliver its report by 1 April 2026.

Researched and written by World Nuclear News

Related topics

Khnp selected to supply new czech nuclear units, work begins on first us gen iv reactor, working group to focus on bwrx-300 deployment in europe, edf withdraws from uk's  smr selection competition, ropower and fluor sign feed 2 contract for smr project, khnp starts contract negotiations for czech reactors, el dabaa project reports on construction progress, construction starts on two new chinese units, study to assess participation in polish supply chain.

WNN is a public information service of World Nuclear Association

Related Stories

Related information, related links.

• Agri-Commodities
• Asean Economic Community
• Banking & Finance
• Business Sense
• Entrepreneur
• Executive Views
• Export Unlimited
• Harvard Management Update
• Monday Morning
• Mutual Funds
• Stock Market Outlook
• The Integrity Initiative
• Editorial cartoon
• Design&Space
• Digital Life
• 360° Review
• Biodiversity
• Climate Change
• Environment
• Envoys & Expats
• Health & Fitness
• Mission: PHL
• Perspective
• Today in History
• Tony&Nick
• When I Was 25
• Wine & Dine
• Live & In Quarantine
• Bulletin Board
• Public Service
• The Broader Look

Today’s front page, Tuesday, August 13, 2024

• Covid-19 Updates
• Photo Gallery

Embracing nuclear power:A key step towards energy security and sustainability

• BusinessMirror Editorial
• August 13, 2024
• 2 minute read

The announcement regarding the government’s nuclear energy plan, as detailed in the Philippine Nuclear Energy Program (PNEP), represents a substantial development in the nation’s energy landscape. This initiative signals a strategic shift in the country’s approach to meeting its growing energy demands and diversifying its energy mix. The PNEP outlines a comprehensive framework for the potential implementation of nuclear power as a viable energy source, which could have far-reaching implications for the country’s long-term energy security and sustainability. (Read the BusinessMirror story: Government eyes construction of nuke power plant by 2028, August 12, 2024).

The ambitious targets outlined in the PNEP, including a minimum nuclear power capacity of 1,200 megawatts by 2032 and a gradual increase to 4,800MW by 2050, signify a commitment to diversifying the country’s energy mix and ensuring a more stable and sustainable power supply for the years to come.

The decision to embrace nuclear power is a bold one, considering the complex regulatory and safety frameworks required for such projects. However, the PNEP appears to have taken these challenges into account by emphasizing the importance of regulatory compliance, transparency, safety, and non-proliferation measures in the development and operation of nuclear facilities.

The signing of the United States-Philippines Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement, also known as the 123 Agreement, further underscores the country’s commitment to international standards and cooperation in the field of nuclear energy. This agreement not only paves the way for collaborations with US providers but also ensures that the development of nuclear power in the Philippines adheres to stringent safety protocols set by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

While the prospect of nuclear power brings with it promises of energy security and reduced carbon emissions, it is crucial for the government to tread carefully and ensure that all necessary precautions are taken to mitigate potential risks. Comprehensive public consultations, robust safety measures, and stringent oversight mechanisms must be put in place to address any concerns regarding the safety and environmental impact of nuclear power plants.

As we move towards a future powered by nuclear energy, it is imperative that transparency, accountability, and stakeholder engagement remain at the forefront of decision-making processes. By fostering a culture of openness and responsibility, the government can build trust with the public and demonstrate its commitment to harnessing nuclear power for the benefit of the nation.

The journey towards a nuclear-powered future may be challenging, but with careful planning, adherence to best practices, and a steadfast commitment to safety and sustainability, the Philippines has the potential to unlock a new chapter in its energy story—one that holds the promise of a cleaner, more resilient, and more secure energy future for generations to come.

While the benefits of a nuclear energy program for the Philippines are clear, the PNEP rightly acknowledges the need to address the risks through transparent and accountable mechanisms. The commitment to ensuring operational transparency, safety, and non-proliferation measures is essential to building public trust and assuring the international community of the country’s responsible approach to nuclear power.

Related Topics

Tax on prizes and awards

• Atty. Rodel C. Unciano

Editorial Cartoon August 13, 2024

The eu ai act is here: what can cios expect.

• Henry J. Schumacher

Stock market tops and drops

• John Mangun

Kristian Somera on turning screaming questions into whispers of answers

Another auspicious year for RS Francisco

• Ricky Gallardo

Spark change to secure our future

• Khalid Hassan
• August 12, 2024

Private credit enters risky terrain with huge bets on consumers

• Abhinav Ramnarayan  & Kat Hidalgo

India set to close in on China as emerging-market stock anchor

• Julhas Alam | The Associated Press

Navigating the future of seamless commerce in Asia Pacific

• KPMG Perspectives

Editorial Cartoon August 12, 2024

Deped, private sector join forces to empower phl’s future workforce, a word about ‘vault files’.

• Siegfred Bueno Mison, Esq.

Adoption of a new BIR logo comes with new expectations

• Joel L. Tan-Torres

One Daily: A new approach to employee well-being

• Atty. Jose Ferdinand M. Rojas II

Ashley and Richard Yap are father-and-daughter goals

• Dinna Chan Vasquez

Team Philippines wins at Precious of Malaysia fashion week

• Miss Charlize

Time to replace annoying office buzzwords

• Millie F. Dizon

Brutal selloff skims froth from Japan’s $6 trillion stock market

• Hideyuki Sano & Aya Wagatsuma
• August 11, 2024

Threat to Keir Starmer persists as riots expose UK social divisions

• Alex Wickham, Ellen Milligan & Ailbhe Rea

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

Nuclear Energy Effectiveness Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

It is argued that nuclear energy has negative impact on the environment. It is believed that nuclear energy can be used to promote terrorism through manufacturing of weapons. It is also feared that the radioactive elements of nuclear can have adverse effects on the environment. However, nuclear energy is the most cost effective and environmentally friendly way of generating electricity.

It is regarded as the most effective way of producing electricity in large scale (Bull 1218). This essay will argue that nuclear energy is the most appropriate way of producing large scale electricity with minimal effects to the environment.

The first argument presented is, nuclear energy can produce large scale electricity without depleting environmental resources available. Nuclear energy is extracted from atomic nuclei through nuclear fission (Serrano & Rus 2374). Moreover, compared to fossil fuels, nuclear energy does not utilize natural resources entirely in order to produce electricity.

The elements used in nuclear power production are renewable due to their radioactive nature; a factor which qualifies it to be classified as a renewable energy. It is evident that developed countries use nuclear energy to produce electricity for both domestic and industrial use. France reprocesses nuclear waste and recovers up t0 95% of the remaining plutonium and uranium which is used as fuel in nuclear plants (Bull 1220).

Although water is used to cool nuclear plants, we can conclude that nuclear energy is the most cost effective method of producing electricity. In addition, it is an environmental friendly and the best alternative for fossil fuels. Nuclear energy is not dependent on natural resources to produce energy, thus these resources are not overused (Bull 1221). We can conclude that nuclear energy is environmental friendly.

The second argument is that nuclear energy does not pollute the environment. Furthermore, it is regarded as a sustainable source of energy because carbon emissions are minimal; it increases security in energy sector and reduces dependence on foreign oil. It does not emit green house gases like carbon dioxide which cause global warming and climate change (Serrano & Rus 2375).

Fossil fuels, natural gas and coal produce green houses which in turn result to climatic changes and global warming. Nuclear energy is regarded as the best option to reduce these adverse effects making it environmental friendly. Although nuclear energy accumulates waste which is an environmental concern; the waste is in small amounts and can be re-used to produce power.

Due to increasing concern over global warming, countries are encouraged to utilize nuclear power to reduce environmental pollution. According to a broadcast in 2007, nuclear energy gives France the cleanest air considering it is an industrialized country. It also provides the whole of Europe with cheap electricity (Serrano & Rus 2376).

In addition, nuclear energy is cost effective because it is affordable and relatively less expensive. Although building of the nuclear plants can be relatively expensive, the maintenance cost of running the plant is low. Considering that fuel (Uranium) is cheap and water is free and readily available, then the cost of running the plant is in expensive.

Moreover, a nuclear plant is able to produce large scale electricity thus making nuclear energy cost effective. It consumes less and produces more. The plants are energy- efficient and little maintenance is required to run them (Bull 1224). As a result, the cost of labour is reduced hence making nuclear energy cost effective.

The fact that nuclear energy produces less greenhouse gases lowers the environmental cost. Nuclear plants can utilizes a small surface area thus making it affordable and less expensive to run. When we combine these factors, we realize that nuclear energy is the most cost effective way of producing electricity (Bull 1226).

In conclusion, the main argument is that, nuclear energy is the most cost effective and environmental friendly method of producing electricity.

In my opinion, it is cost effective because it’s less expensive to run, efficient and the cost of labour is reduced. Moreover, the materials used in nuclear plants are cheap and readily available (Serrano & Rus 2379). I believe, nuclear power is environmental friendly because it does not depend entirely on natural resources to produce energy thus ensuring environmental conservation.

It does not generate greenhouse gases hence has less negative impacts on environment. In my opinion, countries should be encouraged to invest on nuclear energy to produce cheap electricity efficiently. Also use of nuclear energy should be controlled to ensure that it is not used to produce destructive weapons 9 Serrano & Rus 2380).

Works Cited

Bull, R. “Renewable energy today and tomorrow.” Proceedings of the IEEE 2001: 1216-1226. Print.

Serrano, E. & Rus, G. “Nanotechnology for sustainable energy.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2009: 2373-2384. Print.

• Nuclear Energy Benefits
• Saving Water and Methods of Its Protection
• Nuclear Power Provides Cheap and Clean Energy
• Nuclear Energy in Australia
• The Effect of Nuclear Energy on the Environment
• Water Crisis in UAE
• Urbanization and the Environment
• Fossil fuels have no future
• Effects of Global Warming: Currently and Future
• The Process of the Water Cycle
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, June 26). Nuclear Energy Effectiveness. https://ivypanda.com/essays/nuclear-energy-2/

"Nuclear Energy Effectiveness." IvyPanda , 26 June 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/nuclear-energy-2/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'Nuclear Energy Effectiveness'. 26 June.

IvyPanda . 2018. "Nuclear Energy Effectiveness." June 26, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/nuclear-energy-2/.

1. IvyPanda . "Nuclear Energy Effectiveness." June 26, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/nuclear-energy-2/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Nuclear Energy Effectiveness." June 26, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/nuclear-energy-2/.

Cookies on GOV.UK

We use some essential cookies to make this website work.

We’d like to set additional cookies to understand how you use GOV.UK, remember your settings and improve government services.

We also use cookies set by other sites to help us deliver content from their services.

You have accepted additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

You have rejected additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

• Environment
• Energy infrastructure

Masterplan Released for Chapelcross Green Energy Hub

Masterplan published for the future of Chapelcross, showcasing the vision to develop the site into a Green Energy Hub.

Chapelcross site masterplan vision

A masterplan for the future of Chapelcross has been unveiled today, showcasing the vision to develop the site into a Green Energy Hub.

The multi-million pound, net-zero focused development includes plans for hydrogen production storage, advanced manufacturing, and energy and enterprise campuses.

The development of the hub will drive growth in the local economy, attracting high value jobs, skills and activities in the green energy industry to the area.

The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) are now looking to identify a strategic developer who will bring expertise and private finance to help deliver the vision for the site. 

NDA CEO, David Peattie, said:

We are committed to decommissioning our sites safely, securely and sustainably - leaving a positive, long-lasting legacy for future generations. Our ultimate aim is to free up our land for reuse, delivering benefit to local communities the environment and the wider economy – the green energy hub will enable us to deliver this at Chapelcross. The masterplan marks tangible progress in making the hub a reality and is a testament to the value of partnership working. Selecting a strategic developer will enable us to build on this further and leverage the benefits of public and private sector collaboration.

Chapelcross is a former nuclear power plant near Annan and is one of the sites being safely and securely decommissioned by Nuclear Restoration Services (NRS), a subsidiary of the NDA.

The site is over 210 hectares in size and the land owned by the NDA comprises of the nuclear power station site itself which is undergoing decommissioning, the wider nuclear licensed site and unlicensed NDA landholding. The focus of the development is the unlicensed landholding.

Richard Murray, NRS Chapelcross Site Director, added:

We welcome the Chapelcross masterplan, which builds on our rich history of low carbon energy generation and repositions this for a green energy future. The NDA landholding and the site’s range of existing utilities and grid infrastructure will maximise our contribution to net zero and support sustainable economic growth. The significant release of 60 hectares of NDA land to support phase one is the equivalent of 84 adult football pitches! NRS will continue to play an important, strategic role in this project and is committed to retaining vital skills in the region for future developments through our comprehensive decommissioning programme, ensuring that we keep the energy sector supply chain vibrant and robust in our communities - securing opportunities and benefits for all our futures.

The Chapelcross Programme includes a number of strategic partners including Dumfries & Galloway Council, NDA, NRS, South of Scotland Enterprise (SOSE) and Borderlands Inclusive Growth Deal.

Dumfries and Galloway Council Leader, Councillor Gail Macgregor, said:

By commissioning this masterplan, we have a clear vision for delivering future jobs which supports our transition to net zero for the region. We are united with Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) and South of Scotland Enterprise in our ambition for the future of Chapelcross as a powerful force for change in the local economy and look forward to the design developing.

South of Scotland Enterprise (SOSE) is also taking forward an Energy Transition Zone on land adjacent to the main Chapelcross site, which will aim to generate jobs and inward investment focussed on the transition to green energy production.

Jane Morrison-Ross, Chief Executive of SOSE, said:

We are delighted to be progressing our Energy Transition Zone which will kickstart the development of the Green Energy Campus on the main Chapelcross site. We are committed to working with our Chapelcross partners to ensure this excellent location leads our region to a new economy based on green energy production.

The plans are supported by Investment of up to £15.3  million from both UK and Scottish Governments (£7.5m from Scottish Government and £7.8m from UK Government) through the Borderlands Inclusive Growth Deal which could help to finance the access and utility improvements. 

Strategic Developer Proposals must be submitted by 25th October 2024 and the NDA plan to make an appointment early in 2025.

More information is available at www.cxproject.co.uk including the masterplan Chapelcross Masterplan - CX Project .

Share this page

The following links open in a new tab

• Share on Facebook (opens in new tab)
• Share on Twitter (opens in new tab)

Updates to this page

Is this page useful.

• Yes this page is useful
• No this page is not useful

Help us improve GOV.UK

Don’t include personal or financial information like your National Insurance number or credit card details.

To help us improve GOV.UK, we’d like to know more about your visit today. Please fill in this survey (opens in a new tab) .

• Share full article

For more audio journalism and storytelling, download New York Times Audio , a new iOS app available for news subscribers.

She Used to Be Friends With JD Vance

Why a friend of donald trump’s running mate from law school decided to speak out against him..

This transcript was created using speech recognition software. While it has been reviewed by human transcribers, it may contain errors. Please review the episode audio before quoting from this transcript and email [email protected] with any questions.

Sofia, can I ask you to read this email from JD Vance, starting with the date?

OK. “June 29, 2016. Hey, Sofes, here is an excerpt from my book. I send this to you not just to brag, but because I’m sure if you read it, you’ll notice reference to an extremely progressive lesbian. I’m sure most readers will have no idea who it refers to, but you will.

I recognize now that this may not accurately reflect how you think of yourself. And for that, I’m really sorry. I hope you’re not offended. Love you. JD.”

And can you read your reply to that email?

“Hey, buddy. First of all, congratulations. Second, thank you for reaching out and being sweet. Third, it’d take a lot more to offend me than that. How do you think I survived growing up in a similar place as you — gasp — even going to public school as a half-Mexican non-evangelical tomboy?

While we see and care about many of the same problems, I know we often come to different conclusions about how to best address them. But what I value in you is your genuineness, curiosity, kindness, and desire to make a difference. And I consider you a great friend. Love, Sofia.”

How does it make you feel to read those exchanges now?

This relationship we had of mutual respect across the political divide has completely vanished. And I think it’s sad for me personally, but I think it’s also sad for the country.

Why sad for you personally?

It’s heartbreaking to see somebody you respected and cared about turn on you and your neighbors, especially in the context of knowing that’s not who he was. That’s disappointing to see anyone do, obviously.

From “The New York Times,” I’m Michael Barbaro. This is “The Daily.”

As JD Vance has dramatically transformed himself from a vocal Trump critic into a Trump-style candidate and now into Trump’s running mate, few people have witnessed that change from closer up than Vance’s friend from law school, Sofia Nelson.

Over the past week, Nelson has decided to speak out against fans, a decision that began when she gave “The Times” a trove of personal correspondence with Vance from their years-long friendship. Today, I speak with Nelson about what exactly she’s doing, why she decided to do it, and what she’s learned about who JD Vance really is.

It’s Monday, August 5.

So I want to better understand the story of what happened to your relationship with JD Vance and what ultimately led you, over the past few weeks, to share a lot of your personal emails and messages that you exchanged with Vance with “The New York Times.”

But I want to start with the story of your friendship. When did you first meet JD Vance?

JD and I met in the fall of 2010 during orientation at Yale Law School. We were both assigned to the same small group, which is 16 individuals. And so we took all of our first semester courses together, and we were encouraged by the university to bond with that small group. They did so much as pay for us to essentially socialize together.

So we spent a great deal of time together in that first semester. And we bonded over being from the Midwest, coming from working-class communities, going to public school K through 12, which is not the norm at Yale Law School.

Right. There’s a lot of people who go to very fancy private schools.

Yeah, most people at Yale Law School are coastal elites. And so JD and I are not those things. JD grew up in Middletown, Ohio. I grew up in Wayland, Michigan. And the collapse of the auto industry in 2007-2008 devastated my hometown. And obviously, the opioid epidemic that came after that has similarly wreaked havoc.

And we bonded over that. And I think we both were a little shocked by the level of wealth and nepotism present at these elite universities. I remember he was deeply hurt by a comment that one of our professors made, that people who went to state schools tended to perform less well in the Yale Law School environment.

Because he had gone to a state school.

Right, he had gone to Ohio State. And my reaction was, JD, this man is so out of touch. Don’t listen to anything he has to say. Obviously, there’s no monopoly on intelligence by the Ivy Leagues.

Do you remember what he said in response when you tried to console him?

I think he was hell bent on proving them wrong, which was totally within his right. And I think he was very successful at that.

What was his personality in this place? Just give us a sense of him.

I mean, the JD that I became friends with was sarcastic, incredibly curious, motivated. And he loved talking with everyone he could get his hands on about political philosophy and the political issues of our time. And I loved doing the same thing.

I thought JD and I shared a curiosity and a commitment to talking across difference and a desire to solve real problems. My parents and my friends from home were so surprised that, oh, this person that you’ve connected with is on the opposite end of the political spectrum from you. And I was like, yeah, but culturally, we’re very similar.

And how would you describe his political views at the time? Where was he then on the ideological continuum?

I mean, he was a bit of an iconoclast, right? He wasn’t necessarily beholden to a specific ideology at the time. I thought he was somewhat creative in his thinking. He was a voracious reader. He was a conservative who was disillusioned with the culture wars and thought that they were destructive and a distraction.

It’s interesting that you said he’s disillusioned with the culture wars. And just to make sure I understand that, he just doesn’t think there’s much point in having long battles about questions of sexuality or identity. That just didn’t feel useful to him.

That was my belief at the time. And he certainly had a diverse group of friends. I think he was skeptical of the identity politics of the left, and he just didn’t understand why that needed to be a main topic of conversation. Because why can’t we just get to know a person for who they are?

And Sofia, how did you identify at the time during this period of law school? He called you a progressive lesbian in his book, which I take it, from his wording, is not quite accurate.

Yeah, I certainly identified as a progressive and still do. However, lesbian was not the word that I would have used to describe myself at the time, nor do I use that word now. And I have a trans identity and a queer identity. Labels are not that important to me, and I wasn’t offended when he called me a lesbian. And I wouldn’t be offended if someone called me a lesbian today. As long as people are well-intentioned, the language that they use is not going to set me off.

Well, given that, I’m curious how he felt about you and your identity in this period. Was that ever tense or in any way awkward? Did his politics ever become in conflict with who you were?

Absolutely not. My partner at the time was a woman, and we were invited to their wedding. And we went together.

To the wedding of JD Vance and his now wife?

Yes. And when we spoke, even after law school, he would ask me how she was doing. He showed interest and cared about my relationship and my well-being. And I cared about his.

And Usha was also in our small group.

Yes. And I don’t think it even crossed their mind to care if someone was gay or trans or — you just get to know people for who they are. And I had gender-affirming surgery in 2012 while I was in law school. And my partner at the time emailed my closest friends, letting them know that that’s what I was doing and that when I came back to school, it would be really nice if they supported me in my recovery.

And that was very sweet of her to do that. And I remember him bringing me baked goods, and we had a brief conversation that was essentially like, I don’t really know what top surgery is or why you did that, but whatever you need to do to be happy, like I support you, essentially.

And it meant a lot to me because I obviously had a lot of — or maybe it’s not obvious, but I had a lot of queer friends in law school. And I didn’t need to do a lot of explaining about why I was getting surgery to them. And JD wasn’t asking me to explain either.

I don’t need anyone to understand why I needed to get surgery or exactly the complexity of my identities if they can treat me with respect and kindness.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

So you and JD Vance both graduate from Yale Law School. You both leave New Haven. You become this public defender in Detroit. He goes off to a law firm. Did you think that you would stay close and keep in touch?

Yes, I did.

He challenged me intellectually, and I felt like we both benefited from discussing current events and ideas, knowing that we wouldn’t usually agree. I really thought JD helped me think carefully about the issues that I was seeing in my work. And I was hopeful that I was doing the same for him.

Hmm. You were making each other smarter and sharper. I want to talk about that, because I’ve now looked at this correspondence that you shared with “The Times” that occurs after law school. And you two very much become adult pen pals, right? You’re kind of processing everything in the world, some of the most divisive subjects of our time.

You talk about race, policing, affirmative action, and as makes sense, given what we’ve talked about here, you come at them from different perspectives. But you’re both trying to find a lot of common ground, and you often do. And I’m curious, what do you remember most from those exchanges? What stands out to you from them?

It gave me hope. Because at the time, our politics was starting to shift nationally away from any desire to build consensus. His thoughtfulness and our relationship gave me hope that that wasn’t a lost cause.

Do you mind if I engage with some of the specific things he said in those emails? Because I think it will help listeners get a feel for what he’s saying and better understand your reactions to them.

Let me start with the post-Michael Brown exchanges that you guys were having.

Vance writes to you that he thinks it’s important that there be greater accountability for police officers. And he writes, quote, “I love the body camera movement and anything that puts cops back in the mindset of service and protection instead of control and coercion.” And he goes on to say, “I hate the police. Given the number of negative experiences I’ve had in the past few years, I can’t imagine what a Black guy goes through.”

And then, he talks to you about the subject of that horrible mass shooting in Charleston. And he expresses bewilderment that anyone would ever try to disentangle the presence of the Confederate flag over the South Carolina statehouse from what happened in that shooting. And he talks to you about reparations for Black Americans.

And he says, quote, “I will say this — whatever practical or moral problems I have with compensating the ancestors of slaves or compensating,” quote, “Black people as a giant collective, I have at least been convinced of the virtue of compensating modern victims who’ve suffered from redlining or denial of federal benefits or something similar. It makes sense to me,” he tells you, “that Black veterans, who never got their GI Bill benefits are owed something.”

I mean, these are very moderate, highly nuanced, compassionate viewpoints.

Completely. And I remember responding specifically to the reparations discussion because I had sent him Ta-Nehisi Coates’s piece in “The Atlantic,” and that was what launched this conversation. I responded something along the lines of, I think that’s really big, if you, conservative JD Vance, now see that the government has taken action to, in modern times, widen the wealth gap between white and Black Americans through policy, and that the government needs to take action to remedy that. And he was like, well, it shouldn’t be.

I want to talk specifically about Donald Trump, because one thing that really stands out in your emails with JD Vance is how much you two agree on Donald Trump as he emerges onto the political scene. This is 2015, 2016. How did he represent his feelings about Trump in that period?

The public record on this is extensive, and it’s no different from what he said to me personally, which is a recognition that Trump was fanning the flames of racism. And he was very concerned about the effect of that rhetoric on people’s sense of feeling included in their country and their own personal safety.

And that came up in — I live in Detroit. Metro Detroit houses the largest Muslim population in the United States. And one of my friends at the time told me that some of the women in her life that wear a hijab were feeling as harassed and scared around Trump’s rhetoric, doing basic things like going to the grocery store, as they had felt in the wake of 9/11.

And you told him that?

I did. And he responded with empathy and concern.

Right. In his emails to you, he’s pretty unambiguous in his disgust for Trump in this period. I mean, he writes to you that Trump is a disaster. He actually says “a effing disaster.” He calls him a bad man and quote, “a morally reprehensible human being.” What did you think about that?

I thought it reflected his core values. While we differed on tax policy and how big or small government should be, we agreed that nobody should be vilified and dehumanized and that talking about Americans or non-Americans in callous and cruel terms was amoral, right?

I mean, I don’t know Donald Trump, right? I’m sure he has things I could find to love about him if I was his family member or a friend. But the moral injury that his rhetoric has wreaked on this country is devastating. And JD and I agreed on that at the time.

I mean, we shared a belief that what Donald Trump was trying to do was morally reprehensible and dangerous.

We’ll be right back.

So after Trump was elected, was there a point where you noticed that the kinds of conversations that you had been having with JD Vance and the JD Vance you were starting to see out in the world were diverging?

It wasn’t until 2020 his tone on Twitter started changing.

He started name calling. He started adopting Donald Trump’s style of speak. And it’s just not at all reflective of the person I had gotten to know. And it was concerning.

I mean, do you remember specifically the names he called?

Well, I certainly remember the “childless cat lady” comments —

— bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they’ve made, and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable, too.

— and the idea that people who don’t have children don’t have a meaningful stake in the country —

When you go to the polls in this country as a parent, you should have more power. You should —

— and shouldn’t have the same voting rights as people with children.

If you don’t have as much of an investment in the future of this country, maybe you shouldn’t get nearly the same voice.

And then he started making really cruel comments about abortion.

Yeah, I mean, I certainly would like abortion to be illegal nationally.

He came out opposing abortion in cases of rape and incest. And when we talked about abortion in law school, JD was deeply uncomfortable with the concept of abortion. What he relayed to me is what his grandmother had taught him, which is that you can never know what situation a woman is in when she’s making that difficult decision. And it’s not the government’s business, essentially.

And I think he was really struggling with whether he agreed with his grandmother or not, but his extreme opinions started developing in 2020. And when he came out in support of a ban on gender-affirming care in 2021 that was introduced in Arkansas, I reached out to him directly.

When someone is trying to strip you of your political and civil rights and you have their cell phone number, [SIGHS]: at least I felt like I needed to text him about it. And I did.

And what did you say to him?

I asked him if he supported these laws.

These are bans on gender-affirming care for children, specifically the Arkansas bill.

Yes. And we went back and forth. And he acknowledged that it was awkward, but then explained to me that he thought it was experimentation and that I had been brainwashed by Jeff Bezos. And I mean, it was just the tenor of the conversation was completely anathema to the tenor of our previous conversations.

Right. I’ve read this text exchange. And whereas almost all of your previous messages are two generous people working through tough stuff, this one feels like that dynamic is kind of unraveling. And you say to him at one point in this exchange, quote, “The political voice you have become seems so, so far from the man I got to know in law school.”

And JD Vance replies to you, “I will always love you. But I really do think the left’s cultural progressivism is making it harder for normal people to live their lives.” And that back and forth feels like it marks a change in your relationship.

It was incredibly different. And it was incredibly painful and hurtful, this division of Americans that he has embraced of normal people and everyone else. I am a normal person. Queer people are normal Americans.

I mean, I don’t — whatever. I don’t divide the world between normal and abnormal people. I don’t think that helps anyone. And in a lot of ways, I think I lead a much more average life than he does.

I am not a millionaire. I lead a private existence. And specifically, the term “normal” really scared me because he has set up a war between, quote, “normal people” and those who are trying to attack them.

I had shared some pretty personal stuff with him about my experience as a trans kid because I know what it’s like to sit and cry as a kid and think, I have to fix myself. There’s no way that I can be this person and be loved and have a job and be accepted and be OK.

And that is a devastating experience. And I was so hopeful that it would be easier for future generations. And what I was seeing JD engage in is something that was even scarier than what I grew up with.

And so I felt personally betrayed, but also very fearful. And the hope that I was talking about before, that our correspondence gave me, sunk.

Hmm. Could you believe that you were having that conversation?

I believe that the man that I used to know was gone.

So, of course, what happens next is that Vance is catapulted into his political career. He makes peace with Trump, apologizes to Trump, embraces Trump, runs for Senate in Ohio.

Yeah, and I obviously followed what was happening in the Ohio race. And I chose not to say anything at that time. My classmate, Josh McLaurin, leaked a message where JD had privately referred to Donald Trump as America’s Hitler. And obviously, I had similar things in my possession, but I didn’t feel compelled to act at that time, which maybe was a lack of moral courage on my part.

Or lingering affection?

Probably that, too. Yeah, I think it’s still hard for me because I have a lot of fond memories about him and his wife. And. I still care about him on some level. And I didn’t want to betray him, and I think maybe I still held on some hope.

OK, so he’s doing this to get elected. And maybe once he’s in office, we’ll see some moderation. But that obviously hasn’t happened. If anything, he’s gone farther to the right.

And so tonight, Mr. Chairman, I stand here humbled, and I’m overwhelmed with gratitude to say I officially accept your nomination to be vice president of the United States of America.

And every single day for the next four years, when I walk into that White House to help President Trump, I will be doing it for you, for your family, for your future, and for this great country. Thank you. God bless all of you. And God bless our great country.

I want to talk about what it means for Vance to become Trump’s running mate. Because in talking to you about the emails you guys exchanged in those years after law school, it’s hard not to recognize the ways in which being Trump’s running mate means that he’s aligning himself with positions that are very much at odds with what he said to you in some of those emails, right?

I mean, Trump is someone who tolerates zero questioning of the police. Trump is someone who says that the Confederate flag is a proud symbol of the US. That’s so different from the way JD Vance talked to you about the Confederate flag in Charleston, so different from what he said to you about hating the police and being skeptical of them. And it goes on and on, the divergences.

And so it’s once Vance becomes Trump’s running mate that you do start to entertain the idea that these correspondence should become public.

Right. People started reaching out to me saying that reporters were calling them — this was before he was announced — and that they had shared my name with reporters as someone who might have some information. And I kind of took the approach of well, if a reporter calls me, I’ll cross that bridge when I come to it.

And eventually, a reporter did call me.

My colleague, Stephanie Saul.

Correct. And I had a great deal of back and forth with Stephanie. I talked with my partner. I talked with my parents. And then I called a close friend from elementary school who is an independent voter, someone who I have an immense amount of respect for, a single mom living in rural America, trying to do her best. And I wanted her opinion.

And what’d she say?

She said that she votes for people based on their character and that she thinks that this was important information. But she also understood why I was really hesitant to share it. But ultimately that she thought that was important Information was really crucial in my decision.

I think the importance of the correspondence and why I made them public is that JD has tried to explain why he changed his mind on Donald Trump. But I think what the American people deserve to know is that he has changed his position on every conceivable issue that affects everyday Americans. And the timing of those changes line up with his attempt to rise in the MAGA movement.

So they’re indicative of someone who’s willing to turn their back on their core values in order to amass money and power. And I think that reflects a lack of integrity that isn’t something that people want in their leaders. It’s one thing to evolve your opinion on certain issues when you get new information. It’s a completely separate thing to transform your personality and change your position on every conceivable issue in order to advance your career.

And so it’s the integrity, it’s the being a political chameleon that I think people deserve to know.

You have clearly concluded that JD Vance’s transformation was not organic. You see it as a story of ambition overtaking conviction. But I want to talk about a different possibility, or I guess a different interpretation of what’s happened here, and arguably a more generous way of seeing what has happened to Vance.

And it’s that people really do change, and his beliefs have genuinely evolved because of changes around him, because of forces that are present now that weren’t. I mean, and when I try to make sense of how Vance himself describes his transformation, what I hear him saying, and I wonder if you hear him saying it, too, is that liberal policies, top-down liberal approaches to issues like how to handle race, how to handle diversity, how Americans should talk about sexuality and gender, that those have become dogmatic and that he doesn’t think they’ve given Americans a space to think for themselves, and that is how he is processing these changes.

And I wonder if you’ve given him the benefit of the doubt and tried to think about whether that is the explanation.

I don’t live in JD Vance’s head, so I can’t definitively say what his motivations are. I have certainly changed my mind about a number of things, and I hope we all evolve and change our minds. It shows evolution, maturity. Changing your mind with new information is a good thing.

But there’s a difference between evolving and transforming on every conceivable issue and, again, the way you talk about people. I think the content of the emails is important, but also the nature of them. The kindness, the mutual respect is completely gone from the way he speaks publicly. And both of those things are important because the way we talk about people, especially the way our leaders talk about people, has real impact on communities.

It gives everyday Americans — it emboldens them to treat their neighbors with cruelty. It diminishes our ability to have respectful conversations across difference. And so it is very hard for me to imagine that you could transform on, again, every conceivable political issue and also the way you talk about people different from you.

I have a final question for you. What would you say to JD Vance if you felt you could talk to him right now? If you could get past everything that’s just happened and you could just the two of you sit down for a coffee or a beer?

[SIGHS]: It’s a really hard question.

I would ask him why he’s so angry at everyday people who are different from him. What about how I live my life makes it hard for normal people? What did I do? I truly don’t know.

Well, Sofia, thank you so much for your time. We really appreciate it.

Thank you, Michael.

In response to Sofia’s decision to publicly share their correspondence, a spokesman for JD Vance issued a statement. Quote, “It’s unfortunate that this individual chose to leak decades-old private conversations between friends to ‘The New York Times.’ Senator Vance,” the statement said, “values his friendships with individuals across the political spectrum.” The statement added, “Despite their disagreements, Senator Vance cares for Sofia and wishes Sofia the very best.”

Here’s what else you need to know today. On Sunday, Vice President Kamala Harris met with three potential running mates to test their personal chemistry, a sign that her search for a number two has entered its final phase.

Harris met with Arizona Senator Mark Kelly, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, and Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro at her home in Washington, DC. She’s expected to announce her choice by tomorrow.

And Israel is bracing for a major retaliatory attack after its assassination last week of high-level leaders from both Hamas and Hezbollah. At least four major airlines have suspended flights into and out of Israel for fear of an aerial attack from Iran or Lebanon, the countries where the assassinations occurred.

Today’s episode was produced by Alex Stern, Rikki Novetsky, and Lynsea Garrison, with help from Diana Nguyen and Rob Szypko. It was edited by Ben Calhoun with help from Paige Cowett and Patricia Willens, contains original music by Dan Powell, Elisheba Ittoop, and Rowan Niemisto, and was engineered by Alyssa Moxley. Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly.

That’s it for “The Daily.” I’m Michael Barbaro. See you tomorrow.

• Apple Podcasts
• Google Podcasts

Hosted by Michael Barbaro

Featuring Sofia Nelson

Produced by Rikki Novetsky Alex Stern Lynsea Garrison Diana Nguyen and Rob Szypko

Edited by Ben Calhoun Paige Cowett and Patricia Willens

Original music by Elisheba Ittoop Dan Powell and Rowan Niemisto

Engineered by Alyssa Moxley

Listen and follow The Daily Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | YouTube

Senator JD Vance, the Republican vice-presidential candidate, and Sofia Nelson, his transgender classmate at Yale Law School, forged a bond that lasted a decade. In 2021, Mr. Vance’s support for an Arkansas ban on gender-affirming care for minors led to their falling out. Sofia Nelson, now a public defender in Detroit, discussed Mr. Vance’s pivot, politically and personally, with The Times.

Background reading

JD Vance, an unlikely friendship, and how it ended .

Nelson shared with The Times about 90 emails and text messages with Mr. Vance. Here are some of the most revealing moments in their correspondence .

How Yale propelled Mr. Vance’s career .

There are a lot of ways to listen to The Daily. Here’s how.

We aim to make transcripts available the next workday after an episode’s publication. You can find them at the top of the page.

The Daily is made by Rachel Quester, Lynsea Garrison, Clare Toeniskoetter, Paige Cowett, Michael Simon Johnson, Brad Fisher, Chris Wood, Jessica Cheung, Stella Tan, Alexandra Leigh Young, Lisa Chow, Eric Krupke, Marc Georges, Luke Vander Ploeg, M.J. Davis Lin, Dan Powell, Sydney Harper, Michael Benoist, Liz O. Baylen, Asthaa Chaturvedi, Rachelle Bonja, Diana Nguyen, Marion Lozano, Corey Schreppel, Rob Szypko, Elisheba Ittoop, Mooj Zadie, Patricia Willens, Rowan Niemisto, Jody Becker, Rikki Novetsky, Nina Feldman, Will Reid, Carlos Prieto, Ben Calhoun, Susan Lee, Lexie Diao, Mary Wilson, Alex Stern, Sophia Lanman, Shannon Lin, Diane Wong, Devon Taylor, Alyssa Moxley, Olivia Natt, Daniel Ramirez and Brendan Klinkenberg.

Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Paula Szuchman, Lisa Tobin, Larissa Anderson, Julia Simon, Sofia Milan, Mahima Chablani, Elizabeth Davis-Moorer, Jeffrey Miranda, Maddy Masiello, Isabella Anderson, Nina Lassam and Nick Pitman.

Advertisement