Atomic Renaissance

The Economist: Atomic Renaissance

America's nuclear industry is about to embark on its biggest expansion in more than a generation. This will influence energy policy in the rest of the world.

OVER the next few months America's Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) expects to receive 12 applications to build new nuclear-power reactors at seven different sites. It is preparing to see plans for another 15 at 11 more locations next year. These will be the first full applications to build new nuclear plants in America for 30 years. If they are all successful, the number of reactors in the country will increase by roughly a third. The output of nuclear electricity would grow even more sharply—the new reactors would be more powerful than older ones. The new enthusiasm for building reactors means America's long-awaited “nuclear renaissance” is about to become reality.

Whether it is a leap forwards or a step backwards remains to be seen. Since the 1970s, far from being “too cheap to meter”—as it proponents once blithely claimed—nuclear power has proved too expensive to matter. The problem is finance: nuclear plants cost a lot to build but are relatively cheap to run, unlike gas-fired ones, for which the reverse is true. So to be profitable they must be built quickly, to minimise the period when no revenue is coming in and interest payments are piling up on construction loans. Yet America's previous generation of nuclear plants was plagued by safety scares, design revisions and time-consuming regulatory procedures, which resulted in ruinously protracted construction. ...

Comments

[Rob]

Oh, the irony.

[Michael W. Kruse]

I thought the same. It comes down to a choice, assuming you fully embrace the notion that catastrophic global warming is happening:

Do you want to fry or do you want to glow? :)

I think nuclear power is probably about the quickest way to reduce CO2 emissions. Now just watch. About 100 years from now we will have learned that CO2 wasn't a significant issue but half the human population and half the world species die from a nuclear power meltdown.

:)

[Dana Ames]

I'd write a letter, but a) I don't know where it should go; and b) I don't think anyone would listen.

&*()!@#$!!!

Dana

[Michael W. Kruse]

LOL

[Rob]

"... but half the human population and half the world species die from a nuclear power meltdown."

Or 1/4 the population will have died from mercury poisoning because we all switched to fluorescent light bulbs...

Or from massive famines because all the grain harvest has gone to ethanol production...

Oh, the irony!

"The Spirit and the bride say, 'Come!'..."