Britannica AI Icon

Nuclear Power

Is Nuclear Power a Good Form of Energy?

Natural resources—materials or substances found in nature that can be used by humans for personal or economic gain, or even survival—include water, minerals, forests, and fossil fuels, and they are widely used as energy sources. There are two types of natural resources: renewable and nonrenewable. Fossil fuels (such as coal, oil, and natural gas) are finite, nonrenewable natural resources, formed over millions of years from the remains of ancient plants, animals, and microorganisms that were subjected to enormous heat and pressure deep within the Earth’s crust. Alternative energies (alternatives to fossil fuels) include (1) renewable power sources (such as solar, tidal, wind, biofuel, hydroelectric, and geothermal) and (2) nonrenewable nuclear power (considered alternative but not renewable because it relies on uranium, a finite resource not easily replenished).

As reported by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), at the start of 2024 the United States’ energy consumption remained primarily fossil fuels (78 percent, consisting of 10 percent coal, 44 percent natural gas, and 46 percent oil/petroleum). Nuclear energy comprised 8 percent of total consumption, with renewable sources also comprising 9 percent (of these renewable sources, 1 percent was geothermal, 13 percent solar, 9 percent hydroelectric, 18 percent wind, and 59 percent biomass). (Biomass energy includes the burning of wood, human and animal waste, and agricultural crops for heat and electricity and the converting of such crops as corn and soybeans into liquid biofuels, such as ethanol and biodiesel.) Note: Sum of percentages will not always equal exactly 100 percent because of the rounding of numbers. [31][32]

Alternative energies are often called “clean” energies because they generate energy with little pollution, unlike fossil fuels. Whether alternative energy can meet energy demands effectively enough to phase out use of finite (and “dirtier”) fossil fuels is hotly debated.

Nuclear power plays a pivotal role in this debate.

From the discovery of the neutron by James Chadwick in England in 1932 to the nuclear weapons created by J. Robert Oppenheimer and his colleagues in the Manhattan Project (1942–45), many scientists contributed to the discovery of nuclear power and its uses. The first nuclear reactor was built by Enrico Fermi at the University of Chicago. Proving that a nuclear reaction could be initiated, controlled, and stopped, Fermi’s Chicago Pile-1 (CP-1)—the first human-created, self-sustaining nuclear reactor—went “critical” (producing a stable, self-sustaining chain reaction) on December 2, 1942. The reactor was used for research until it was decommissioned in 1953. [1][2][3]

Click for more on nuclear fission, nuclear power, and nuclear reactors.

The first major use of nuclear power was for the creation of the atomic (nuclear fission) bomb, which was exploded on July 16, 1945, on the desolate plains of the Alamogordo Bombing Range, located 210 miles (193 km) south of Albuquerque, New Mexico. The next two atomic bombs were used by the U.S. military during World War II, dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan, on August 6 and 9, 1945, respectively, effectively ending the war. Nuclear weapons have not been used since. [4][29]

At the close of World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union entered what would be a decades-long Cold War that increased public unease with nuclear energy—mainly the fear that the Soviet Union would develop nuclear weapons and use them on the United States. On December 8, 1953, U.S. Pres. Dwight D. Eisenhower gave his “Atoms for Peace” speech at the United Nations General Assembly, in which he said:

The United States pledges before you—and therefore before the world—its determination to help solve the fearful atomic dilemma—to devote its entire heart and mind to find the way by which the miraculous inventiveness of man shall not be dedicated to his death, but consecrated to his life. [5][6]

Click for more on atomic bombs and nuclear weapons.

After World War II, nuclear reactors were built for consumer power generation. The first reactor capable of significant electric power generation and the first to power a small town was in Idaho; it generated electricity for the nearby town of Arco for about two hours on July 17, 1955. Called BORAX-III (short for “Boiling Reactor Experiment”), it was used for experiments until 1956. [3][4][7][8]

The world’s first reactor used for large-scale commercial power production was the Calder Hall A reactor in Cumbria, England. However, the nuclear plant was primarily intended for plutonium production for the United Kingdom’s nuclear weapons program. Providing power to residences, which it did from 1956 to 2003, was a secondary service. [3][9]

In the United States enthusiasm over nuclear power as a domestic energy source was quelled by the Three Mile Island accident in 1979, during which its TMI-2 nuclear reactor had a partial meltdown. The other reactor, TMI-1, was taken offline for a few years after the accident but later continued power production until being decommissioned in 2019. The subsequent nuclear accidents in Chernobyl, Soviet Union (in what is now Ukraine), in 1986 and in Ōkuma, Fukushima, Japan, in 2011 further fueled concerns about the safety and reliability of nuclear energy. [10][11][12][13]

However, the increasing urgency to slow climate change and the dramatic rise of artificial intelligence (AI) have reignited interest and, some say, the undeniable need for increased nuclear power production. For example, Constellation Energy, which owns the TMI-1 reactor at Three Mile Island, has partnered with Microsoft to restart TMI-1 to power the company’s AI data centers as soon as 2027. [11][13][14]

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), there were (as of late 2025) 417 active nuclear power reactors globally, with 23 others in suspended operation, and 62 under construction. The World Nuclear Association notes that nuclear power reactors generate electricity in 31 countries, providing about 9 percent of the world’s electricity. Overall, 14 countries derived at least 25 percent of their energy from nuclear power in 2024. France, which has 57 active nuclear reactors, relied on nuclear power for nearly 70 percent of the country’s electricity. Slovakia (with five reactors) relied on nuclear for almost 61 percent of electricity, whereas Hungary (with four active reactors) and Ukraine (15 reactors) used nuclear power for about 50 percent. [15][16]

The United States has 54 nuclear power plants with 94 active nuclear power reactors that generated just more than 18 percent of the country’s power in 2024. The oldest operational commercial nuclear power reactor is Nine Mile Point Unit 1 in New York (it began production in December 1969) and the newest is Vogtle Unit 4 in Georgia (began production in April 2024). The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licenses reactors for an initial operation period of 40 years. Extension licenses may be granted for a total of 80 operational years. [16][17][18]

So, is nuclear power a good form of energy? Explore the debate below.

Pros and Cons at a Glance

PROSCONS
Pro 1: Nuclear power has zero emissions and can reliably and inexpensively support an electricity grid. Read More.Con 1: Nuclear power is dangerous, from the risk of meltdowns to the problem of nuclear waste. Read More.
Pro 2: Nuclear power is a perfect complement to weather-dependent renewable energies. Read More.Con 2: Nuclear power is expensive to initiate and delays implementation of truly sustainable and renewable energy sources. Read More.
Pro 3: Nuclear power protects America’s global national security interests. Read More.Con 3: Nuclear power is inextricably linked to lethal nuclear weapons. Read More.

Pro Arguments

 (Go to Con Arguments)

Pro 1: Nuclear power has zero emissions and can reliably and inexpensively support an electricity grid.

Without emitting any greenhouse gases, one nuclear reactor can power a city the size of Philadelphia. One gummy bear-sized uranium pellet has a comparable energy-production capacity of one ton of coal, 149 gallons of oil, or 17,000 cubic feet (480 cubic meters) of natural gas. [19]

Nuclear Works, an effort by the Nuclear Energy Institute to promote nuclear industry careers, explains,

Nuclear energy comes from splitting atoms in a reactor to heat water into steam, which then turns a turbine to generate electricity. Ninety-four nuclear reactors in 28 states generate nearly 20 percent of the nation’s electricity, all without carbon emissions because reactors use uranium, not fossil fuels. These plants are always on: well-operated to avoid interruptions and built to withstand extreme weather, supporting the grid 24/7. [20]

Furthermore, nuclear energy has the highest capacity factor (the ability of an energy source to run consistently and effectively at maximum output, given downtimes, maintenance, fuel availability, etc.) at 92.5 percent. By contrast, the capacity factor of natural gas is 56.6 percent and coal sits at 40.2 percent. [19][21]

Pro 2: Nuclear power is a perfect complement to weather-dependent renewable energies.

Solar and wind energy are weather-dependent, and although batteries can store energy produced by these sources for use on cloudy and windless days, nuclear power can serve as a reliable and consistent complement to these environmentally friendly but limited energy sources.

As the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) explains,

Wind, solar, and energy storage can get us much of the way to a carbon-free future, but ensuring a balanced mix with nuclear energy will help us get there faster and more reliably. Nuclear provides dependable, always-on power and complements other carbon-free energy sources, which are not always available. When you combine nuclear’s contribution to carbon-free electricity with wind and solar, that’s over 80 percent of our clean energy. Small reactors will be able to integrate with intermittent sources and help provide electricity when the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing. The result is a more reliable, cleaner supply of electricity. [19]

In other words, investing in and relying on a diverse energy portfolio will promote each energy’s benefits while minimizing its liabilities. [19]

Pro 3: Nuclear power protects America’s global national security interests.

According to the Nuclear Energy and National Security Coalition,

A strong civil nuclear export sector creates deep and long-lasting relationships between the United States and partner nations across important areas that advance America’s national security interests including nonproliferation [of nuclear weapons], nuclear safety, and physical and cyber security. Ensuring an active role in the global market for nuclear reactors, technology, and fuel preserves U.S. influence over nonproliferation and nuclear safety standards is not diminished. [22]

The U.S. pioneered the nuclear industry, but international forces—primarily Russia and China—are driving global expansion, putting the American desire for the controlled and benevolent expansion of nuclear capacity at risk. Like it or not, nuclear power is a necessity in today’s geopolitical world. [22]

Con Arguments

 (Go to Pro Arguments)

Con 1: Nuclear power is dangerous, from the risk of meltdowns to the problem of nuclear waste.

In 1971 former Manhattan Project nuclear physicist Ralph Lapp described the “China syndrome,” or the possibility that if a nuclear reactor were to lose coolant, a “huge, molten, radioactive mass” would “sink into the earth and continue to grow in size for about two years” and “persist for a decade.” According to this scenario, the molten core would burn through the containment vessel and the Earth’s crust, continuing all the way to China. [23]

Though the China syndrome remains hypothetical, nuclear disasters are all too real. The 1986 Chernobyl disaster resulted in an unknown number of deaths, rampant radiation sickness, contamination of farms and forests, deformed livestock births, and the evacuation of about 200,000 residents. Furthermore, an exclusion zone of some 1,600 square miles (4,100 square km) still surrounds the decommissioned plant and includes radiation hotspots. [24][25]

Even considering the relative rarity of nuclear meltdowns, nuclear waste must still be stored. There are more than 100 nuclear waste storage sites across 39 U.S. states that house about 90,000 tons of radioactive nuclear waste. This waste puts populations at risk of radioactive leaks that poison water and food supplies and affect human health. [26][27]

Con 2: Nuclear power is expensive to initiate and delays implementation of truly sustainable and renewable energy sources.

As Greenpeace argues,

New nuclear plants are more expensive and take longer to build than renewable energy sources like wind or solar. If we are to avoid the most damaging impacts of climate change, we need solutions that are fast and affordable. Nuclear power is neither. [28]

From planning to operation, a single nuclear power plant takes about 14.5 years to build. Conversely, a rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) project takes about six months, and wind and solar farms used to power utilities take 2–5 years from planning to operation. [27]

Conservative cost estimates put a new nuclear plant at 251 to 268 percent higher than a new onshore wind or utility-scale solar photovoltaic project. [27]

Greenpeace concludes, “Nuclear energy isn’t just bad for the environment, it’s bad for our economy.” [28]

In other words, why invest in and rely on nonrenewable energy when it’s quicker and less costly to implement renewables now?

Con 3: Nuclear power is inextricably linked to lethal nuclear weapons.

A paradox of nuclear power is that the technology, infrastructure, and natural resources needed to produce energy are the same used for nuclear weapons.

Though many assert that U.S. control over nuclear energy results in the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons, Mahmoud Javadi of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel asks us to consider a “darker trajectory”:

An algorithm misfires, a hacker breaches a nuclear command-and-control system, a rogue nation defies protocols. Missiles are launched in panic; cities are reduced to ash. Humanity confronts its darkest hour. This isn’t speculative fiction: it’s the knife-edge reality in which we live each day. [30]

He concludes, “Nuclear security is a precarious illusion.…The path forward is not to refine this fragile balance but to dismantle it entirely.” [30]

Slideshow: Nuclear Power Plant Disasters: Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima

1 of 10

Assessment Quiz

Take our assessment quiz to test your knowledge of nuclear power and other alternative energy sources. Good luck!

1-Minute Survey

After reading this debate, take our quick survey to see how this information affected your opinion of this topic. We appreciate your feedback.

Discussion Questions

  1. Is nuclear power a good form of energy? Why or why not?
  2. Should nuclear power be used to complement renewable energies? Explain your answer.
  3. Compare nuclear power to wind, solar, and fossil fuel energies. Which would you choose to power a town and why?

Sources

  1. Ellis P. Steinberg, “Nuclear Fission” (October 10, 2025), britannica.com
  2. Lawrence Badash, “Enrico Fermi” (November 24, 2025), britannica.com
  3. Bernard I. Spinrad, “Nuclear Reactor” (November 14, 2025), britannica.com
  4. Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Atomic Bomb” (November 8, 2025), britannica.com
  5. Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Cold War” (November 19, 2025), britannica.com
  6. Dwight D. Eisenhower, “Atoms for Peace” (December 8, 1953), voicesofdemocracy.umd.edu
  7. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, “Idaho Town Gets Atomic Power and Light in Nuclear Power Demonstration” (August 12, 1955), ne.anl.gov
  8. Argonne National Laboratory, “Reactors Designed by Argonne National Laboratory” (accessed November 24, 2025), ne.anl.gov
  9. Institution of Civil Engineers, “Calder Hall Nuclear Power Station” (accessed November 24, 2025), ice.org.uk
  10. Moody’s Investors Service, “New Nuclear Generation: Ratings Pressure Increasing” (June 2009), nukefreetexas.org
  11. Peter Hall and John Cole, “Microsoft Describes Three Mile Island Plant as a Once-in-a-Lifetime Opportunity” (June 25, 2025), penncapital-star.com
  12. Laila Kearney, “Three Mile Island Nuclear Plant Reboot Fast-Tracked to 2027” (June 26, 2025), reuters.com
  13. World Nuclear Association, “Safety of Nuclear Power Reactors” (February 11, 2025), world-nuclear.org
  14. World Nuclear Association, “How Can Nuclear Combat Climate Change?” (accessed November 24, 2025), world-nuclear.org
  15. World Nuclear Association, “Nuclear Power in the World Today” (November 19, 2025), world-nuclear.org
  16. International Atomic Energy Agency Power Reactor Information System, “The Database on Nuclear Power Reactors” (accessed November 24, 2025), pris.iaea.org
  17. U.S. Energy Information Administration, “Frequently Asked Questions: How Old Are U.S. Nuclear Power Plants, and When Was the Newest One Built?” (accessed November 24, 2025), eia.gov
  18. U.S. Energy Information Administration, “Frequently Asked Questions: How Many Nuclear Power Plants Are in the United States, and Where Are They Located?” (accessed November 24, 2025), eia.gov
  19. Nuclear Energy Institute, “Nuclear Provides Carbon-Free Energy 24/7” (accessed November 24, 2025), nei.org
  20. Nuclear Works Group, “What Is Nuclear Energy?” (accessed November 24, 2025), nuclearworks.org
  21. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy, “Nuclear Power Is the Most Reliable Energy Source and It’s Not Even Close” (March 24, 2021), energy.gov
  22. Nuclear Energy and National Security Coalition, “Why It Matters” (accessed November 24, 2025), nensc.org
  23. Ralph E. Lapp, “Thoughts on Nuclear Plumbing.” (December 12, 1971), nytimes.com
  24. Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Chernobyl Disaster” (November 1, 2025), britannica.com
  25. Ben Turner, “What Is the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone?” (February 3, 2022), livescience.com
  26. Gerald Frankel, “How and Where Is Nuclear Waste Stored in the US?” (April 14, 2025), theconversation.com
  27. Mark Z. Jacobson, “7 Reasons Why Conventional Nuclear Energy Is Not the Answer to Solve Climate Change” (June 4, 2025), oneearth.org
  28. Greenpeace, “Nuclear Power Is Dirty, Dangerous, and Expensive. Say No to New Nukes.” (accessed November 24, 2025), greenpeace.org
  29. U.S. Department of Energy, “Trinity Site—World’s First Nuclear Explosion” (accessed November 24, 2025), energy.gov
  30. Mahmoud Javadi, “The Paradox of Nuclear Politics: Peace, Progress, Peril” (accessed November 25, 2025), theloop.ecpr.eu
  31. U.S. Energy Information Administration, “U.S. Energy Facts Explained” (accessed January 13, 2025), eia.gov
  32. U.S. Energy Information Administration, “Monthly Energy Review” (September 2025), eia.gov