Washington should let Nuclear Power Play a Role in Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Uranium (Nuclear Minerals) / Nuclear Power - Economics, Design, & Industry

Date posted: 08/12/16

Mark J. Perry opines that nuclear energy was conceived in hope that the peaceful use of the atom would provide reliable and affordable electricity for millions of Americans and improve our quality of life. That hope has come closer to realization than anyone could reasonably have expected when the process began more than 60 years ago. Notwithstanding opposition from anti-nuclear adversaries, nuclear energy is too important to let slip away. It is vital to ensuring a dependable supply of electricity, helping to maintain a diverse energy mix that keeps electric rates as low as possible and ensures that consumers and businesses are not overly reliant on just one or two sources of electricity. The U.S. fleet of about 99 nuclear reactors generates nearly 20% of the U.S. electricity without polluting the air or emitting greenhouse gases. Based on national averages, each reactor employs between 400 and 700 highly skilled workers, has a payroll of about $40 million and contributes $470 million to local economies. But these achievements are now in danger. Due to the availability of low-cost natural gas as a result of the shale-gas revolution, plus generous politically driven subsidies and mandates for wind and solar power, we can no longer take for granted that some nuclear plants will continue to operate much longer. According to a Bloomberg study, 56% of U.S. nuclear energy will be unprofitable within three years. Since 2012, utilities have either shut down or announced plans to close 13 nuclear power reactors around the U.S., the most recent being the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant in CA. As with nuclear plants that have already been prematurely retired, the loss of additional nuclear-generating capacity would be replaced largely with electricity generated from natural gas plants. From an environmental standpoint, natural gas is much less friendly than nuclear energy, which is a zero-carbon source of energy that supplies well over half of the U.S. carbon-free power.