The nuclear option isn’t as radioactive as you think

The word nuclear often has a bad rap. But in the 21st century, it’s slowly being decoupled from its former roots in our vernacular as it shows increasing promise to be the bearer of a sustainable energy source for the future.

New technologies are making it more possible to design safe and sustainable nuclear programs, but slowly shifting public opinion still stands in the way of all-out progress. Changing conversations about nuclear’s promise and its place in a diversified power grid could be what the industry needs to ensure the future is powered safely and sustainably.  

What’s the deal with nuclear energy?

Nuclear energy is what’s produced when uranium or plutonium atoms are split apart, a process called fission. This process takes place in a reactor, of which there are several kinds, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. Today, about 10% of the world’s electricity is produced this way in large nuclear power plants.

Fusion reactors, which generate electricity through atoms being joined together, are on the horizon. A consortium of seven founding member states, including the EU, are working to build the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) and have partnered since 2005 to develop a fusion program, leveraging the 3DEXPERIENCE platform and various solutions like CATIA and ENOVIA to achieve their goal. The project represents the most ambitious effort in nuclear development in scientific history, given its scale, collaborative framework and potential breakthrough for unlimited energy. Simultaneously, the UK Atomic Energy Agency is also using the 3DEXPERIENCE platform to develop its own fusion power plant with the goal of completing the project by the year 2040.

The most common types of fission reactors are differentiated largely by the coolant each uses to regulate the temperature of their core. Water reactors use water, while fast neutron reactors have liquid sodium, lead or gas to cool their internal operations. Each type of reactor generates electricity and heat, but they also all produce nuclear waste, which must be recycled, stored underground or otherwise disposed of.

Then there are small modular reactors (SMRs). While some SMRs are simply scaled-down versions of tried-and-true types of reactors, some represent an innovative approach to making transportable, reliable, safe nuclear power available on a massive scale. One such innovation is the molten salt reactor: these use molten salt as fuel and coolant to create a self-regulating environment that produces little waste, making them symbols of the generative economy. Molten salt reactors also don’t require uranium or plutonium but thorium, an element both safer than its counterparts and more abundant by a factor of three.

While there are some concerns about the waste output of other types of SMRs, they’re still seen as a potentially viable version of their traditional counterparts. They also provide solutions to some of the biggest challenges faced by existing reactors and plants. While their smaller nature means they produce less electricity, they also produce less waste. SMRs cost less to construct and operate, running a tab between $300 million and $2 billion, compared to the $10 billion price tag on traditional reactors.

And when it comes to reliability and uptime, SMRs might have the upper hand, too.

“In terms of distribution and decentralization, SMRs could really help,” said Philippe Castera, a plasma physicist by training and a data analysis and science manager within BIOVIA.

If a large nuclear plant needs to be serviced or decommissioned, it can create a massive disruption to the power grid it services. In February, three US reactors suffered outages, forcing unexpected reliance on fossil fuels – whose cost spiked 34% – to make up the difference in energy output. Small reactors don’t face this type of issue, so the distribution of energy sources within an overall power grid makes these types of reactors an attractive option, in addition to their unique safety features, environmentally-friendly elements and approachable price tag.

SMRs are already being developed using the simulation of virtual twins that take into account the entire nuclear ecosystem. One French start-up is already leading the charge in technological innovation and sustainable practices: NAAERA is not only using the 3DEXPERIENCE platform to develop their SMR, they’re also converting the nuclear waste from the reactor’s production process into clean, decarbonized energy.

Nuclear as a sustainable energy source

Nuclear energy can be a sustainable alternative to traditional energy sources like coal and oil primarily because of its ability to generate large amounts of power with minimal greenhouse gas emissions. Generating nuclear energy also doesn’t put a strain on natural resources, making it double efficient. Therefore, it can be an essential tool in mitigating climate change and reducing global carbon footprints. Additionally, new types of reactors are showing signs of remarkable efficiency, capable of running continuously to provide a steady and reliable energy supply—an important factor for meeting rising global energy demands without compromising environmental goals.

All this makes nuclear energy sound ideal. The problem? People don’t think of it that way.

Christophe Marchand, a solution experience senior manager in Dassault Systèmes’ Infrastructure, Energy & Materials sector, thinks shifting public opinion, especially around sustainability, could be a significant means to progress – and it’s not impossible to achieve.

“We need to explain to people that nuclear has the lowest rate of CO2 emissions,” Marchand said. The fission process used to create nuclear energy emits nearly no carbon during a reactor’s operation, a fact the public might be surprised to learn.

The other side of the equation is that, in some places, mining the raw materials needed to produce nuclear energy could be doubly sustainable, as it would shorten typically long supply chains needed to transfer other energy materials like oil and gas. Uranium ore, the core component in a nuclear reactor, can be found practically everywhere on earth, though some places have richer or more abundant deposits, like Kazakhstan and Niger, and even that uranium still needs to be enriched. By identifying end-to-end solutions, like virtual twins to understand and map out sustainable mining and shipping processes, the greenhouse gas emissions from the nuclear lifecycle could be reduced, making nuclear an even more attractive option for the eco-conscious crowd.

Nuclear’s success depends, on the one hand, on public knowledge about its safety and usefulness and, on the other, on its sustainability. Without adequate education, there’s little progress to be made.

How public opinion is preventing nuclear progress

Despite positive scientific evidence on nuclear’s promise, public perception of it as an energy resource remains somewhat skeptical. A recent study from the Climate and Public Opinions International Observatory found that 43% of individuals surveyed were adamantly against the development and use of nuclear power plants.

So what’s the deal?

Given the public memory of nuclear accidents, there’s significant opposition to any type of industrial progress. Consider what happened in Germany in 2011. Shortly after the disaster at Fukushima, and owing to strong opposition from her constituency, former chancellor Angela Markel ordered the country’s 17 nuclear power plants shut. That decision resulted in a significant uptick in German usage of fossil fuels for energy in the years since. This wasn’t an isolated incident but a clear example of how public pressure can result in policy changes that prevent nuclear progress entirely.

Additionally, there’s a longstanding global movement promoting the use of other kinds of energy sources: renewables. Wind and solar have been promoted as the most viable energy sources of the future, emitting little carbon while being a reliable source of power – facts that have granted them favorability among two-thirds of the global population. It’s worth noting that these energy sources, though deserving of their gold star status, do still require energy-intensive extraction and refining to create their necessary components. However, they’re still relatively inexpensive, generally reliable and, though their lifecycles are short, they can be decommissioned and replaced with ease and little emissions. Because they’re so viable, programs dedicated to research and expansion of renewables get significant funding, to the tune of $2 trillion annually. In comparison, global investment in nuclear programs barely surpasses $50 billion. Thanks to its reputation, nuclear is missing from the conversation on advocating alternatives to fossil fuels.

Adding nuclear energy into the mix could create a diversified power grid that relies even less on oil, gas and coal. But this won’t happen without a shift in public opinion.

Such a shift isn’t impossible. A 2023 study by the American Nuclear Society identified younger generations in the United States as being the most opposed to nuclear energy development. Understanding generational differences could be a starting point for shifting public opinion. To move the needle, industry partners can identify opportunities for opening or otherwise contributing to educational programs, like Dassault Systèmes’ Centers of Excellence, which bring industrial knowledge to institutions of higher learning. These programs work to ensure the next generation has the tools, knowledge and know-how they need to succeed. Starting by educating the up-and-comers can foster a more nuclear-positive culture for decades to come.   

Questions on nuclear safety

For most people, the world “nuclear” is followed in their minds by “weapons” or “disaster,” terms that neither spark joy nor respect for the industry’s energy promise. To be clear, the processes, inputs and outputs required to produce nuclear weapons differ from those needed to create nuclear energy. In any case, nuclear energy has both civilian use cases and industrial safeguards that make it a viable, secure solution for power production. Decoupling today’s nuclear projects from the ones of the past remains a challenge. What happened in Germany in 2011 is indicative of this.  

“Fear often stems from misunderstanding,” Marchand commented. ”Nuclear energy is seen as dangerous because of its association with warfare or past accidents. The truth is, it’s the cleanest and most efficient energy source we have when managed correctly. It needs to be framed not as inherently dangerous but as a low-risk, high-reward solution to global energy challenges.”

Marchand’s colleague Xavier Bussenault, the business consulting director in Dassault Systèmes’ Industry, Energy & Materials sector, agrees.

“There’s a misconception that nuclear plants built in the 80s or 90s are unsafe, but all plants are regularly improved and modernized with safety in mind,” Bussenault said. “Lessons learned from accidents like Fukushima have been taken into account by all nuclear power plant owners.”

The nuclear industry, he added, is highly regulated, so risks are constantly being identified and assessed so further ones can be mitigated. Designing virtual twins of a plant and all its processes, from fabrication to construction and operation, represents an innovative strategy for ensuring necessary safeguards are in place across the entire operation.

What to do about nuclear waste

“Low-risk” isn’t how most people see anything nuclear-related today. Nuclear is in need of a better communications strategy.

Assuaging fears around the treatment of nuclear waste could help to improve the public’s understanding of nuclear energy as a whole. People know that nuclear waste is dangerous – and it is, when mishandled – but they don’t know about the processes and safeguards in place to prevent that danger. The World Nuclear Organization found that the public believes the industry still lacks a cohesive solution for dealing with nuclear waste. But the public isn’t seeing the whole picture.

Nuclear waste is the byproduct of the fission process. It’s not green goo, like “The Simpsons” would lead you to believe, but solid pieces of radioactive metal. There are two main methods for dealing with waste: treat it and store it or treat it and recycle it.

To recycle waste, the metal bits are liquefied and then treated with different chemicals to separate their core components, uranium and plutonium. Then you’re back to square one with what you’d need to feed into a reactor in the first place. 

France, the global leader in nuclear power, recycles 96% of its nuclear waste and stores the remaining 4% in vaults deep underground. To further their efforts to operate nuclear plants in a safe and sustainable way, the country’s nuclear policy council recently confirmed the need for developing a special type of reactor, called a fast neutron reactor, that would facilitate even further their ability to recycle waste, creating a closed loop, generative system.

In the United States and in several European countries, underground waste storage is standard, and the World Nuclear Association has verified that the practice of deep geological disposal is safe.

Quelling concerns about environmental damage from other aspects of nuclear power production will also benefit the industry’s progress. Making sustainable practices like precision mining an industry standard will work to this effect, showing how the end-to-end operation of nuclear reactors can be managed with environmental consequences front of mind.

The policy aspect

Beyond public perception, there’s the issue of ensuring policies exist that will encourage the development of safe, reliable nuclear energy programs.

The obvious solution, posed by Bussenault, is advocating for industrial standardization and regulatory harmonization. Deployment at scale, particularly for SMRs, would benefit greatly from this.

“Today, each country has its own standards and regulations,” he said. “To reach an economy of volume and build global supply chains, the industry needs to align on common standards for the design and manufacturing of reactor components. And to avoid redesigning the same reactors for each customer or country, regulators need to harmonize their licensing practices.”

Today, the process of getting nuclear reactors and projects approved by governing and regulatory bodies is extremely difficult, expensive and time-consuming. Existing licensing and regulations were outlined and approved for non-nuclear infrastructure and thus aren’t compatible with nuclear’s novel approaches. Experts have warned that nuclear codes and standards need to be rewritten to include SMRs and other new types of reactors, though the time required to update these is substantial. Currently, new projects must apply for exemption, another lengthy, expensive and involved process, and one that’s not set up for scalability. Without significant changes, nuclear power won’t be able to truly take off.

To bookend nuclear policy and make it as safe as possible for the long-term, requirements for sustainable mining and waste recycling practices will need to be put into place, enforcing environmental conservation across the board. Technology-sharing programs between global nuclear leaders and developing economies could ensure that both leaders and late adopters engage in innovative, sustainable practices that take into account energy needs and environmental concerns.

Could nuclear be the final frontier?

Nuclear, like other technologies, presents an opportunity for innovation and progress. That progress is slowly being made.  

Dozens of countries around the world are already developing nuclear power plants – and using innovative technologies to achieve this feat – yet only a small handful are actively deploying the power these plants produce to the grid for consumption. In February, Texas A&M University announced a project to house four first-of-its-kind nuclear reactors on the school’s campus to explore new ways to produce energy. Further north in Michigan, one company is embarking on a five-year plan to build a fleet of small modular reactors. In the UK, GE Hitachi is developing a boiling-water small modular reactor specifically to produce energy without excess carbon emissions.

The most likely way forward is to explore new technologies and concepts, to create first-of-its-kind reactors that push the conventional limits of production and innovation. This is part of the mission behind ITER, which will eventually produce a fusion reactor twice the size of the largest machines in operation on the planet. By exploring avenues like these, industrial leaders can make waves in creating an energy source that’s not just powering the world, but doing so sustainably.

“There is little doubt that Nuclear energy is part of the equation to achieve sustainable development goals while keeping climate change at bay. The other part of the equation consists of more efforts in energy efficiency and a sustained deployment of renewables targeting countries still relying heavily on fossil fuels,” said Bussenault. Painting a picture of nuclear as a component of a clean, efficient energy offer supported by both regulatory efforts as well as a shift in public opinion.

For nuclear power to really take off, widespread adoption will need to follow these initial efforts. And despite the stigma, public and political resistance and skepticism that surrounds anything remotely nuclear, this power source continues to emerge as a safe, sustainable option for powering the world.