In my PL SC 419 course (The Bureaucracy), we’ve been discussing organizational theory. Last week, we specifically looked at the Three Mile Island incident, and the organizational disconnects that led to the human error that produced the partial meltdown. Now, most of us were not yet alive when this disaster happened (my fellow SC 200 classmates), but the view of nuclear power after the partial meltdown at TMI was grim. Even though it produced clean energy, the public wanted no more nuclear power plants to be built because of the possible damage it could cause if something went wrong, like it did on March 28th,1979 at TMI. The fear of a mismanaged plant was greater than the benefit of clean energy without carbon emissions (fossil fuel plants give off carbon emissions). American’s problem with nuclear power lied more so in the management aspect of it than the actual technical process.  

So, 34 years after the partial meltdown, we are finally starting to see nuclear power plants being built. Nuclear power has numerous benefits; it is a clean source of energy, it is a cost effective source of energy, and the technology to develop these plants is readily available. Some drawbacks people see in nuclear power is the disastrous reality if a complete meltdown were to occur (Chernobyl). Another concern is what to do with the radioactive waste that is produced. From a political standpoint, nuclear power plants could become targets of terror attacks, if the attack that happened on the World Trade Center was to happen on a nuclear power plant, the results would be devastating to the entire globe.

Currently, there are many plans for nuclear plants in the process of coming on line.  I believe that nuclear power is a good source to use to produce clean energy. Yes, the radioactive waste is a concern, but it is one that can be dealt with. The carbon emissions from fossil fuel plants are more of a demon than dealing with where to keep the radioactive waste from a nuclear plant. Another reason why I believe nuclear power is beneficial is because the threat of another accident has been greatly reduced since the Three Mile Island partial meltdown. The official report on why the partial meltdown occurred was lack of communication between plants (the valve that failed had also failed in several other instances, but had never led to a meltdown), and because human intervention of the controllers stopped the system from fixing the problem itself. Nuclear power is designed with checks and balances to make sure that if one of the pieces fails, there is a backup mechanism to correct it. When that valve failed, the system had started to fix it by running the water over the core like it was supposed to. It was only when the human controllers shut off the water did the meltdown begin. After the TMI incident, nuclear power plant companies realized they cannot operate a nuclear plant like a fossil fuel plant. They began reforming the managerial system as well as training employees to be knowledgeable in nuclear power to know what to do when something does go wrong.

So, do you feel nuclear power is a good thing? Or that it is simply too risky and we shouldn’t be building plants?