Its future will depend not only on engineering but also on the historical legacies of trust, risk, and necessity. The atom, once split, continues to shape the world in ways both luminous and uncertain.
By Matthew A. McIntosh
Public Historian
Brewminate
Introduction
On December 20, 1951, four small lightbulbs glowed in a remote corner of Idaho. They were powered not by coal, gas, or hydro, but by the fission of uranium atoms in the Experimental Breeder Reactor I (EBR-I). This moment has often been heralded as the birth of the nuclear age of energy, a technological watershed that promised to transform electricity generation and redefine human mastery of nature.1 Yet the subsequent history of nuclear power reveals both soaring ambition and sobering caution. From postwar optimism to disasters that reshaped public trust, from the Cold War’s geopolitical imperatives to contemporary debates over climate change, the story of nuclear energy is as much about social imagination as it is about physics.
The Experimental Breeder Reactor and the Early Vision
The EBR-I, completed by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, was not intended as a large-scale power plant but as an experiment in breeding more fissile material than it consumed.2 The reactor produced a modest amount of electricity, but its symbolic value was immense. It demonstrated that controlled fission could generate usable power, not only weapons.
The optimism of the 1950s was palpable. U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s “Atoms for Peace” speech in 1953 framed nuclear power as a global good, a means of securing energy independence and elevating living standards worldwide.3 Nations began investing heavily in nuclear research, seeing in it a solution to the growing demands of industrial modernity. Early plants in the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union became emblems of progress, their cooling towers and domes visual shorthand for a futuristic world.
Expansion and the Cold War Context
By the 1960s and 1970s, nuclear power had become central to energy policy in industrialized nations. The technology spread rapidly, with the United States, France, the Soviet Union, and Japan building extensive reactor fleets. France, in particular, pursued an aggressive nuclear program, eventually deriving more than 70 percent of its electricity from atomic energy.4
The Cold War context mattered profoundly. Nuclear power promised not only civilian energy but also dual-use pathways for weapons. States invested heavily in nuclear infrastructure as part of broader strategic competition. Civilian nuclear energy thus cannot be disentangled from the geopolitics of deterrence, secrecy, and rivalry.
Yet enthusiasm also bred criticism. Concerns about radioactive waste, reactor safety, and centralized control of energy infrastructure emerged as early as the 1960s. These tensions laid the groundwork for the political struggles that would come to dominate nuclear power’s history.
Crises of Trust: Accidents and Public Perception
The trajectory of nuclear optimism was dramatically altered by accidents that exposed the fragility of human control over atomic forces. The 1979 partial meltdown at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania rattled public confidence in the United States.5 Though contained, the incident highlighted both technical vulnerabilities and the inadequacy of crisis communication.
Even more devastating was the 1986 explosion at the Chernobyl reactor in Soviet Ukraine. The disaster released massive amounts of radioactive material across Europe, displacing communities, contaminating land, and creating a lasting symbol of nuclear danger.6 The opacity of Soviet authorities compounded the catastrophe, fostering global distrust not only of nuclear technology but of the political regimes that administered it.
In 2011, the Fukushima Daiichi accident in Japan reignited these fears. Triggered by a massive earthquake and tsunami, the disaster reminded the world that nuclear risk was not only technical but environmental, entangled with natural forces beyond human control.7 The accident prompted Germany to commit to phasing out nuclear energy entirely, while other nations reassessed their safety protocols and future investments.
Nuclear Power and Climate Change
Despite such crises, nuclear power has persisted, sustained by its promise of low-carbon energy. In an era of climate change, advocates have argued that nuclear energy offers a crucial alternative to fossil fuels, capable of delivering baseload power without greenhouse gas emissions.8 France’s long-standing reliance on nuclear plants has been held up as evidence that large-scale deployment is feasible.
Yet debates remain contentious. Opponents emphasize unresolved questions of waste storage, high construction costs, and the catastrophic potential of accidents. Advocates counter that new reactor designs, such as small modular reactors and next-generation fast breeders, promise safer and more efficient use of nuclear fuel. In this way, nuclear power sits at the crossroads of environmental urgency and technological ambition, its reputation still marked by its historical wounds.
Case Studies
The United States
The United States, birthplace of the EBR-I, pursued nuclear power with both technological ambition and political hesitation. In the 1950s and 1960s, reactors such as Shippingport and Dresden demonstrated the feasibility of commercial-scale plants, and utilities embraced the promise of abundant energy.9 Yet the partial meltdown at Three Mile Island in 1979 dramatically altered the trajectory. Public opposition surged, regulatory requirements tightened, and construction costs soared. For decades afterward, few new reactors were commissioned. The American nuclear landscape came to symbolize both the technological possibility and the social fragility of nuclear energy.
France
France’s path diverged sharply. Following the oil crises of the 1970s, the French state made a decisive commitment to nuclear power as a strategy of energy independence. Through the centralized authority of Électricité de France (EDF), the country built a standardized fleet of reactors at remarkable speed, transforming its energy profile in less than two decades.10 By the 1980s, more than 70 percent of French electricity came from nuclear plants, a level unmatched globally. France became both a showcase and a lightning rod, hailed for its efficiency but criticized for waste storage challenges and its export of nuclear technology abroad.
The Soviet Union and Post-Soviet Space
The Soviet Union pursued nuclear power as part of its vision of technological supremacy. Plants were built across the vast territory, with designs that often prioritized rapid construction over safety redundancy. The 1986 Chernobyl disaster exposed the dangers of this approach with catastrophic clarity. The explosion not only devastated Ukraine but also undermined Soviet legitimacy, accelerating the erosion of public trust in the late Cold War era.11 After the collapse of the USSR, successor states inherited aging reactors. Russia, however, continued to invest in nuclear energy, presenting itself in the twenty-first century as a major exporter of nuclear technology.
Japan
Japan embraced nuclear energy after World War II as a means of reducing dependence on imported fossil fuels. By the early 2000s, it operated one of the largest nuclear programs in the world, with reactors supplying nearly a third of its electricity.12 Fukushima Daiichi in 2011, however, profoundly reshaped Japanese policy. The earthquake and tsunami that triggered multiple meltdowns led to widespread evacuations and long-term contamination. Public opinion turned sharply against nuclear power, and the government suspended all reactors for safety reviews. Although some have since restarted, the social legitimacy of nuclear energy in Japan remains fragile.
Conclusion
From the flickering bulbs of EBR-I to sprawling national programs, the history of nuclear power is not monolithic but highly regional. The United States demonstrated both pioneering leadership and public ambivalence. France constructed an unparalleled nuclear state. The Soviet Union revealed the costs of secrecy and haste, while Japan embodied both technological mastery and vulnerability to natural disaster. These case studies highlight how nuclear power has always been entangled with political choices, cultural attitudes, and environmental contingencies.
Nuclear energy remains both promise and peril. Its future will depend not only on engineering but also on the historical legacies of trust, risk, and necessity carried forward by each society. The atom, once split, continues to shape the world in ways both luminous and uncertain.
Appendix
Footnotes
- Richard Rhodes, Nuclear Renewal: Common Sense about Energy (New York: Penguin, 1993), 21.
- Richard G. Hewlett and Francis Duncan, Nuclear Navy, 1946–1962 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974), 103–104.
- Dwight D. Eisenhower, “Atoms for Peace,” Address to the United Nations General Assembly, December 8, 1953.
- Gabrielle Hecht, The Radiance of France: Nuclear Power and National Identity after World War II (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998), 7–10.
- J. Samuel Walker, Three Mile Island: A Nuclear Crisis in Historical Perspective (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004), 45–52.
- Kate Brown, Manual for Survival: A Chernobyl Guide to the Future (New York: Norton, 2019), 14–18.
- Daniel P. Aldrich, Black Wave: How Networks and Governance Shaped Japan’s 3/11 Disasters (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2019), 112–117.
- Spencer R. Weart, The Rise of Nuclear Fear (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2012), 201–205.
- Richard Rhodes, Energy: A Human History (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2018), 312–315.
- Gabrielle Hecht, The Radiance of France: Nuclear Power and National Identity after World War II (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998), 23–27.
- Kate Brown, Manual for Survival: A Chernobyl Guide to the Future (New York: Norton, 2019), 64–70.
- Daniel P. Aldrich, Black Wave: How Networks and Governance Shaped Japan’s 3/11 Disasters (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2019), 27–30.
Bibliography
- Aldrich, Daniel P. Black Wave: How Networks and Governance Shaped Japan’s 3/11 Disasters. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2019.
- Brown, Kate. Manual for Survival: A Chernobyl Guide to the Future. New York: Norton, 2019.
- Eisenhower, Dwight D. “Atoms for Peace.” Address to the United Nations General Assembly, December 8, 1953.
- Hecht, Gabrielle. The Radiance of France: Nuclear Power and National Identity after World War II. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998.
- Hewlett, Richard G., and Francis Duncan. Nuclear Navy, 1946–1962. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974.
- Rhodes, Richard. Energy: A Human History. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2018.
- ———. Nuclear Renewal: Common Sense about Energy. New York: Penguin, 1993.
- Walker, J. Samuel. Three Mile Island: A Nuclear Crisis in Historical Perspective. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004.
- Weart, Spencer R. The Rise of Nuclear Fear. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2012.
Originally published by Brewminate, 08.26.2025, under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license.
About the Author
