In this blog post, we will take a comprehensive look at the safety, environmental impact, and economic viability of nuclear power plants and examine the argument that South Korea’s nuclear power plants should not be shut down.
The Fukushima Nuclear Accident and the Debate Over Nuclear Power
On March 11, 2011, a magnitude 9.0 earthquake struck off the coast of northeastern Japan, and the resulting massive tsunami flooded the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. Due to the flooding, both external and emergency power supplies to the plant were cut off, causing the cooling systems to shut down and resulting in core damage. Subsequently, hydrogen explosions occurred in several reactors, resulting in the massive release of radioactive materials into the environment. This accident forced more than 100,000 residents to evacuate for an extended period and had a significant impact on the soil and marine environments.
Following the Fukushima nuclear accident, global concern over the safety of nuclear power increased, and the view that nuclear power plants should be phased out gradually gained traction. However, when comprehensively considering the current state of alternative energy development as well as environmental and economic factors, there is a well-founded view that South Korea should not hastily phase out its nuclear power plants.
Why Did the Nuclear Accident Occur?
Compared to the total number of nuclear power plants in operation worldwide, the incidence rate of major nuclear accidents is very low. Furthermore, major nuclear accidents are generally assessed as resulting from a combination of complex external factors and failures in safety management, rather than from inherent flaws in the nuclear power generation process itself.
A prime example is the Chernobyl nuclear accident, which occurred on April 26, 1986, in the former Soviet Union. This accident is known to have resulted from a combination of reactor design flaws, safety procedure violations during operational testing, and operational errors. It is difficult to attribute the accident solely to operator error.
The Fukushima nuclear accident was also directly caused by massive natural disasters—a powerful earthquake and a massive tsunami—and the damage was exacerbated by disaster prevention designs that were unprepared for a tsunami far larger than anticipated, as well as limitations in securing emergency power.
As such, the likelihood of major nuclear accidents increases when safety design, operating procedures, and emergency response systems are inadequate. Conversely, it is also recognized that nuclear power can be a relatively stable form of energy generation if safety is prioritized above all else, the latest safety standards are applied, and emergency response systems are continuously strengthened.
Is Nuclear Power Good for the Environment?
One of the main arguments put forward by those advocating for the closure of nuclear power plants is that nuclear power has a negative impact on the environment. However, when comparing only the greenhouse gas emissions generated during the power generation process, nuclear power emits far less carbon dioxide than fossil fuel-based power generation.
Based on a life cycle assessment (LCA) of the entire energy source lifecycle, power generation using coal and oil emits high levels of greenhouse gases, whereas nuclear power is assessed to emit levels similar to wind power or, according to some studies, even lower. Therefore, in terms of carbon neutrality and addressing climate change, nuclear power is classified as a relatively environmentally friendly energy source.
Germany phased out its nuclear power plants in accordance with its energy transition policy and shut down its last nuclear reactor in 2023. However, this process was accompanied by various controversies surrounding the stability of the power supply, electricity rates, and dependence on fossil fuels. In particular, the combination of soaring international energy prices and a reduction in Russian natural gas supplies led to an increase in the use of coal-fired power generation for a certain period.
In contrast, France continues to rely heavily on nuclear power for a significant portion of its electricity production. Although the share of renewable energy has been steadily expanding recently, nuclear power still plays a central role in the country’s electricity supply. Thanks to this energy mix, France is regarded as one of the major industrialized nations that produces electricity with relatively low carbon emissions.
Although there are differences in the energy policies of various countries, from the perspective of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, nuclear power continues to play a vital role and can be viewed as a power generation method with certain environmental advantages.
Is nuclear power a cost-effective source of electricity?
The second reason why nuclear power plants should not be shut down is their high economic viability. Although the initial construction costs for nuclear power plants are very high, fuel costs are relatively low over the long term, enabling a stable power supply. Additionally, it has the advantage of providing a consistent output, making it suitable for use as a baseload power source.
Data previously released by Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power also indicated that the average cost per unit of electricity generated by nuclear power is highly competitive compared to other major power sources. However, opinions have recently been raised that costs such as nuclear plant decommissioning, spent nuclear fuel management, and safety equipment upgrades must also be taken into account. Nevertheless, internationally, nuclear power is still regarded as one of the most competitive power sources from a long-term perspective.
South Korea is a country with limited energy resources, importing most of its major energy resources—such as oil, natural gas, and coal—from abroad. Furthermore, since fossil fuels are finite resources, it is crucial to establish a stable power supply system from the perspective of long-term energy security. While South Korea also relies on imports for the uranium used in nuclear power generation, it has the advantage of being able to produce a large amount of electricity over a long period even with small quantities and can be stockpiled for extended periods.
Currently, South Korea’s electricity production is provided by a combination of nuclear power, liquefied natural gas (LNG), coal, and renewable energy sources. Nuclear power accounts for a significant share of total electricity generation and is one of the key power sources that reliably supplies electricity to industries and households. In South Korea, a country with limited energy resources, nuclear power—with its high generation efficiency and stable supply capacity—continues to play a vital role.
Shutting down nuclear power plants could also affect electricity rates. Germany experienced a period of sharp increases in electricity rates as it pursued its nuclear phase-out and energy transition policies, a period that coincided with rising international energy prices and instability in natural gas supplies. Of course, these rate hikes were not caused solely by the nuclear phase-out; changes in the international energy market also played a significant role.
In contrast, France has established a stable power generation system based on nuclear power and plays a key role in the European electricity market through power trading with neighboring countries. Nuclear power also contributes to a certain extent to maintaining a country’s industrial competitiveness and energy security.
If South Korea were to rapidly scale back its nuclear power generation, it would need to replace the resulting power shortfall with other energy sources. However, since South Korea’s power grid is not interconnected with those of other countries as Europe’s is, importing large amounts of electricity from neighboring nations is not practically feasible. Consequently, it is likely that additional power generation facilities would need to be built or the share of fossil fuel-based power generation would have to increase, which could lead to higher power generation costs and electricity rates.
Furthermore, as a country possessing technology for the design, construction, and operation of nuclear power plants, South Korea is also participating in overseas nuclear power projects. Nuclear technology is linked not only to power plant operations but also to the competitiveness of various nuclear-related industries. Considering these economic aspects, nuclear power can be viewed as an important source of electricity even today.
Safety Is the Top Priority in Nuclear Power Generation
However, even nuclear power—which excels in environmental friendliness and economic efficiency—faces challenges that must be addressed. The most critical of these is safety. If safety is neglected, the possibility of national disasters such as the Fukushima or Chernobyl nuclear accidents cannot be completely ruled out.
A prime example is Kori Nuclear Power Plant Unit 1. Kori Unit 1 began commercial operation in 1978 and continued to operate after its design life was extended, but was permanently shut down in 2017. Decommissioning procedures are currently underway. This can be considered a case where the decision to permanently shut down the plant was made after thoroughly reviewing the safety of the aging reactor.
The Fukushima and Chernobyl nuclear accidents are both prime examples that demonstrate the importance of ensuring safety. Learning from these accidents, decisions on whether to continue operating aging nuclear power plants must be made only after thorough safety assessments, and facilities that fail to meet safety standards must be shut down without hesitation. Conversely, it is crucial to operate power plants that meet the latest safety standards while ensuring safety through continuous inspections and equipment upgrades.
Prioritizing efficiency over safety can lead to a national disaster. Therefore, regardless of whether nuclear power generation is expanded, it is of the utmost importance to operate these facilities with safety as the top priority.
Conclusion
The society in which we live today cannot function normally without electricity. Not only electronic devices used in daily life, such as smartphones and computers, but also hospitals, data centers, industrial complexes, railways, and communication networks—in short, society as a whole—operates on the basis of a stable power supply. Furthermore, with the expanding adoption of electric vehicles and the growth of the artificial intelligence, semiconductor, and robotics industries, electricity demand is projected to increase even further in the future.
To meet this continuously growing demand for electricity, it is crucial to utilize a balanced mix of various power generation sources. While renewable energy is expanding rapidly given current technological levels, its output fluctuates depending on weather conditions; therefore, the role of baseload power sources, such as nuclear power, is still considered vital for ensuring a stable power supply.
Of course, energy policy could change if energy storage technologies or next-generation renewable energy technologies advance significantly in the future to the point where they can fully replace nuclear power. However, at this point in time, abruptly phasing out nuclear power could lead to increased dependence on fossil fuels and have a significant impact on the stability of the power supply and the national economy.
That said, ensuring safety is just as important as maintaining nuclear power generation. Aging nuclear power plants must be rigorously evaluated according to the latest safety standards, and decisions on whether to continue their operation must be made with great care; facilities where safety cannot be guaranteed should be shut down in accordance with appropriate procedures. Conversely, power plants where safety has been sufficiently ensured must be operated stably through continuous inspections and equipment upgrades.
Ultimately, nuclear power continues to play a vital role in terms of environmental sustainability, economic viability, and energy security; it is an energy source that should be utilized prudently, provided that safety is the top priority. Taking these environmental and economic factors into comprehensive consideration, it is advisable for South Korea to seek ways to operate its nuclear power plants rationally while strengthening safety measures, rather than hastily decommissioning them.
