Shutting down nuclear plants in the US could cause thousands of deaths every year

This raises an important question. Should those ageing reactors be retired, or should they be reinforced and refurbished so that they continue producing nuclear power, a low-carbon alternative to fossil fuel sources like coal and petroleum?

But now, a new study by MIT researchers published in Nature Energy, adds fuel to the fire of the debate by answering a pressing question–how many premature deaths will be caused by phasing out nuclear energy?

Smoke rises from the nuclear power plant of Nerckarwestheim in Neckarwestheim, Germany, on Aug. 22, 2022. (AP Photo/Michael Probst, File)

But how will phasing out nuclear reactors cause deaths?

Well, if many of those 92 nuclear plants are shut down, the energy will have to come from somewhere.

This vacuum left by nuclear power will be taken over by a combination of coal, oil, gas and of course, renewable energy sources. Some of these sources will cause an increase in air pollution, which could catalyse premature deaths.

To understand this better, the researchers created a “dispatch model” in which they laid out a scenario where every nuclear power plant in the country has been shut down. They then considered how the other energy sources would fill in the gap in energy supply.

Based on this, their analysis revealed that air pollution would increase overall as fossil fuel energy will have to be ramped up. Of course, that in itself may not come as a surprise but what is impressive is that the researchers have come up with an estimated number of people that will die prematurely as a result of this increased pollution.

They estimate that it will result in an additional 5,200 pollution-related deaths.

FILE — The Fayette Power Project, a coal-fired power plant, near La Grange, Texas, April 13, 2021. The Supreme Court ruling in the Environmental Protection Agency case on Thursday, June 30, 2022, was a significant victory for libertarian-minded conservatives who have been working for decades to curtail or dismantle modern-style government regulation of the economy. (Tamir Kalifa/The New York Times)

Can ramping up renewable energy prevent these deaths?

On the flip side, if more renewable energy sources become available to fill the gap in the energy supply, the amount of air pollution will be reduced, but not eliminated.

The researchers tested an optimistic scenario where renewable energy will substantially compensate for the lack of nuclear energy. Even in this scenario, there will be a slight increase in air pollution in some parts of the country. This could result in a total of 260 pollution-related deaths in a year.

Who could die prematurely due to the shutting down of nuclear plants?

Well, the simple answer is that the increased air pollution would affect pretty much everyone in the United States. But things are often not that simple.

According to MIT, when the researchers looked at the populations that will be affected by the increased pollution, they found that black or African American communities will be more exposed.

This is because a disproportionate number of these communities live near fossil-fuel plants. According to a report by the Energy Justice Network based on the US Census of 2000, 68 per cent of African Americans in the country live within 30 miles of (48.2 kilometres) of a coal power plant. This is the distance within which the maximum effects of the smokestack plume are expected to occur.

“This adds one more layer to the environmental health and social impacts equation when you’re thinking about nuclear shutdowns, where the conversation often focuses on local risks due to accidents and mining or long-term climate impacts,” said study lead author Lyssa Freese, in a press statement. Freese is a graduate student at MIT’s Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences.

According to study co-author Noelle Selin, air quality has not been a focus of the discussion around whether ageing nuclear power plants should be kept open or shut down. The study found that air pollution from fossil fuel plants is so damaging, that anything that increases can have substantial impacts. And it will affect some people more than others.

A bird flies over the Three Mile Island Nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania. The disaster that happened there had spurred the shutting down of reactors in the past. (Source: Reuters)

Have nuclear plant shutdowns in the past caused increased air pollution?

As the controversial historical figure, Winston Churchill once said, those that failed to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

After the Three Mile Island nuclear incident in 1979, the United States closed down some nuclear reactors in the Tennessee Valley Area. This meant that electricity generation had to shift to coal reactors in the area. This shift had a massive negative health impact on the residents of these areas with coal plants, especially infants.

Yes, nuclear energy comes with many hazards, including safety and problems with radioactive waste management. But it looks like shutting down existing reactors could be a bad idea as well, unless we are able to rapidly ramp up renewable energy sources.