Skip navigation
sponsored by 

New nuclear power ‘wave’ — or just a ripple?

How millions for lobbying, campaigns helped fuel U.S. industry's big plans

MSNBC.COM VIDEO
Nuclear neighbor
In a debate certain to be replayed over and over again in the next few years, residents of Lacey Township, N.J., debate the future of the Oyster Creek nuclear plant -- the nation's oldest operating nuclear facility -- as its operators seek a 20-year extension of its operating license.

MSNBC.com

  Photo features  
  More
Farmer inspects sunflower crop in field in Taragarh village, on outskirts of Amritsar
Reuters
  Week in Pictures
A crop outgrows the farmer, a cloud spins and sparks, and soldiers suffer in the sand
Image: University fire
AP
PhotoBlog
View and discuss the pictures and issues that caught our eyes.
By Mike Stuckey
Senior news editor
MSNBC
updated 4:50 a.m. ET Jan. 23, 2007

Mike Stuckey
Senior news editor

E-mail
Buoyed by billions of dollars in subsidies pushed through Congress by the Bush administration, the U.S. nuclear power industry says 2007 is the year its plans for a “renaissance” will reach critical mass.

“We see a wave,” said Steve Kerekes, a spokesman with the Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry’s chief lobbying arm, pointing to letters of intent by a dozen firms to seek licenses for as many as 31 new nuclear power reactors. “We definitely believe it’s going to be a whole new era of new plant construction in this country.”

Kerekes credits improvements in plant design and efficiency and the ability to operate without spewing carbon into the air — a key advantage amid mounting concern about global warming — as chief reasons for the resurgence.

Story continues below ↓
advertisement

But critics say the real catalyst has been well-funded lobbying by the industry. They believe tax dollars spent to jump-start the dormant industry would be better devoted to alternative energy sources like wind and solar power.

"If this were a renaissance, you wouldn’t need to be enticing giant corporations with subsidies in order to get them to build reactors they claim are economically viable,” said Jim Riccio, nuclear policy analyst for the environmental group Greenpeace, a staunch foe of nuclear energy.

A remarkable turnaround
Regardless of which side is eventually proved correct, the mere discussion of building dozens of new reactors is a remarkable turnaround for an industry that less than 10 years ago was widely viewed as the energy sector’s unsafe and expensive also-ran. And it’s a textbook case of how the wheels of government can change direction quickly when enough money, influence and political will are applied.

Nuclear power proponents say the interest in new plants is just one sign that the technology may finally be on the verge of achieving the widespread acceptance and use they have long envisioned. Among them:

  • The relicensing of four dozen U.S. commercial reactors.
  • The emergence of well-known environmentalists as supporters of nuclear technology.
  • Groundbreaking for a new uranium enrichment plant in New Mexico.
  • A breathtakingly ambitious Bush administration plan for a global nuclear fuel cartel to light up the developing world with electricity while avoiding the threat of nuclear proliferation.

Ardent foes of nuclear energy like Paul Gunter of the Nuclear Information and Resources Service respond that these actions all are the result of pro-nuclear work by industry supporters in Congress and the Bush administration, not a genuine watershed in how investors and the public view nuclear power.

“There’s a big difference between a letter of intent and the filing of an application,” he said of the new plants, predicting that problems with waste disposal, safety and security will ultimately stall what he refers to as a nuclear power “relapse.”

And while key committee chairmanships will remain in the hands of strong pro-nuclear lawmakers, the retaking of Congress by the Democrats could also present some roadblocks, especially on the central issue of waste, he said.

That lawmakers are once more considering such issues shows how far the nuclear energy needle has moved since the mid-1990s.

Three Mile Island: The last straw
After its birth as an outgrowth of weapons programs in World War II, the nuclear energy industry battled design problems, cost overruns, safety issues and environmental foes for years to wind up with the 103 U.S. reactors that remain in commercial operation today from California to New Hampshire.

As construction delays and costs escalated, the meltdown at Pennsylvania’s Three Mile Island nuclear plant in the spring of 1979 was the last straw for those who held the purse strings to new reactor construction. No new commercial reactors have been ordered since, although previously ordered plants continued to be built and come online until 1996.

INTERACTIVE
How a nuclear plant works
The basic steps involved in turning a nuclear reaction into electricity
The 1986 accident at the Chernobyl nuclear plant in the Soviet Union, which is blamed for about 60 deaths by the World Health Organization, further tarnished the technology’s image. At that point, “any talk about a new plant (in the U.S.) would have been dismissed as childish optimism,” admits nuclear power’s chief congressional cheerleader, Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M.

While accidents and economics halted nuclear expansion in the U.S., they did not have the same impact elsewhere. Of the 322 operating electricity-generating reactors currently in operation outside the United States, 171 began operating in the 1980s, 48 in the 1990s and 28 so far this century, according to the NEI. Twenty-nine more reactors are under construction outside the country, and 10 nations get more than 40 percent of their electricity from nuclear reactors, led by France at 78.5 percent.

In the U.S., chastened nuclear operators focused on improving safety and efficiency at existing plants. They were successful: There have been no notable U.S. accidents since Three Mile Island and the U.S. reactor fleet has produced at about 90 percent of licensed capacity since 2001, up considerably from efficiency figures of the early 1980s. Nuclear plants today produce about 20 percent of the electricity used in the United States.

Industry improvements are “an outgrowth, in all honesty, of the Three Mile Island accident," NEI's Kerekes said, "because the steps that were taken after that do a better job of sharing information in our industry and applying best practices.” 

Rate this story LowHigh
 • View Top Rated stories

Sponsored links

Resource guide

Search Jobs

Find your next car

Find Your Dream Home

Find a business to start

$7 trades, no fee IRAs