Nuclear power good for environment

By Barclay G. Jones Copyright 1998 St. Louis Post-Dispatch December 21, 1998

While we devote unprecedented resources to environmental-improvement strategies that have enhanced the quality of life in almost every American city and community, a serious threat to the environment remains ignored.

Today's clean air depends upon non-polluting nuclear energy, but precisely because of this dependency, pollution prevention may be approaching an about-face, just as it is achieving enormous benefits.

Despite its environmental advantages, the future of nuclear energy is in doubt: the Energy Information Administration, data-gathering branch of the federal Department of Energy, warns that as many as 24 of the nation's 108 nuclear power plants might close prematurely, reducing U.S. nuclear capacity significantly.

Shutting down nuclear plants would require more fossil fuels to be burned, causing far greater quantities of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and fine particles of soot to be spewed into the atmosphere - turning every part of the country into a non-attainment area under the Clean Air Act.

This is not a comforting thought at a time when health authorities estimate that tens of thousands of Americans a year are dying prematurely from air pollution.

Understand this: For the past quarter century, nuclear energy has been the nation's most important source of clean power for avoiding airborne emissions that result from burning oil, natural gas and coal.

According to a new study by Washington-based Energy Resources International, nuclear energy - by substituting for fossil-fuel power plants - has prevented 219 million tons of sulfur dioxide and 98 million tons of nitrogen oxides from being discharged into the atmosphere since 1973. Emission-free nuclear energy also has avoided the release of more than 2 billion tons of carbon dioxide, a major greenhouse gas linked to global warming.

Although many environmental groups still seem to regard nuclear power as the energy source of last resort, that could change. Earlier this year, the Natural Resources Defense Council, considered by many to be the nation's most influential environmental organization and a leader in the battle against air pollution, reached a landmark agreement with New Jersey's largest utility, Public Service Electric & Gas. The Natural Resources Defense council agreed to support the Newark-based utility's full recovery of investments in nuclear plants and other facilities that might be "stranded" by electricity deregulation. In turn, the utility said it would expand its energy-efficiency program.

The NRDC said the accord with the New Jersey utility was made possible by the utility's "remarkable" past support for a campaign aimed at reducing pollution from coal-fired power plants in the Midwest. The council's support for the recovery of billions in stranded nuclear costs demonstrates that it believes the continued use of nuclear power is essential if we expect to meet the nation's electricity requirements without undermining efforts to reduce atmospheric pollution and greenhouse-gas emissions.

Now is the time for state policymakers with the help of Congress to use this agreement as a model in electricity deregulation. Nationally, we need to recognize the intrinsic economic value of emission-free nuclear power. For years it has supplied trillions of kilowatt-hours of clean electricity without earning tradable credits under the Clean Air Act. Congress must rectify this oversight by allowing utilities to receive credits for nuclear plants, thereby boosting the value of nuclear plants and helping the ensure their continued operation in a competitive, restructured electricity industry.

To underscore nuclear power's value in attaining environmental goals, the Clinton administration should establish a national policy to maintain both the current generation of nuclear plants and continue research and development on the next generation of advanced nuclear plants. A good start would be for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to extend the original 40-year operating licenses of plants in Maryland, South Carolina and Georgia that have submitted applications for license renewal. The commission's review process - which is expected to take at least three years for each plant - should benefit Midwest utilities in their preparations for license renewal.

Comments on this posting?
Click here to post a public comment on the Trash Talk Bulletin Board.
Click here to send a private comment to the Junkman.

Material presented on this home page constitutes opinion of Steven J. Milloy.
Copyright © 1998 Steven J. Milloy. All rights reserved on original material. Material copyrighted by others is used either with permission or under a claim of "fair use." Site developed and hosted by WestLake Solutions, Inc.