EVENTS

Date:	Friday, October 6, 2006
Time:	10:00 AM -- 4:30 PM
Location:	Wohlstetter Conference Center, Twelfth Floor, AEI 1150 Seventeenth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036

October 2006

Is Nuclear Power a Solution to Global Warming and Rising Energy Prices?

 

Has the threat of global warming and soaring fossil fuel costs changed the prospects for nuclear energy? Advocates stress its potential cost-effectiveness and the coming generation of safe, efficient plants. Critics maintain that efficiency is a mirage and that environmental uncertainties remain. While technological advances have made nuclear power plants safer than ever, the United States has not ordered a new one since the 1970s. Yet new nuclear facilities are coming on line in India, China, and eastern Europe, while the United Kingdom and other G-8 countries have cautiously endorsed a move toward nuclear energy as an alternative to expensive and greenhouse gas-emitting fossil fuel plants. Whether the legacies of Three Mile Island and Chernobyl and a determined political opposition will derail new construction remains to be seen.

Would an increased commitment to nuclear generation be wise--financially and environmentally? Will the new generation of nuclear plants be safer and more efficient? What are the regulatory constraints faced by the nuclear industry? On October 6, AEI held a conference to examine whether there has been a shift in views toward nuclear energy, and if so, what the public policy consequences will be.

Panel I: Nuclear Power and Climate Change

Judi Greenwald
Pew Center on Global Climate Change

The challenge to stabilize global climate change is to stabilize the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide, preferably to 550 parts per million. This goal may be reached by taking advantage of current technologies as well as further research and development to deepen the portfolio of technologies in the future. This includes the development of nuclear power.

Unfortunately, there are some barriers to increasing production of nuclear power. These include financial, technical, political, and societal issues, waste disposal, risk of proliferation, safety, and public concern. Fortunately, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 is a nuclear-friendly policy, and it keeps the option open for increased nuclear power.

Ernest J. Moniz
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

There are three challenges to supplying energy today. The first is the supply and demand of energy. The second is the relationship between energy and security, specifically the geological and geopolitical realities of the oil supply. Finally, the relationship between energy and the environment will drive the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and address aspects of climate change.

Fortunately, fifty years is a feasible time frame to convert to a different form of energy production. There are five drivers of reconsideration of spent fuel management: a renewed interest in nuclear power plant construction, the fact that the ability of Yucca Mountain to be licensed has not yet been confirmed, the failure of government to begin to accept spent fuel, global expansion of nuclear power, and concerns of proliferation. Furthermore, the Bush administration has proposed a Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, entailing advanced fuel cycles that reprocess spent fuel and recycle all actinides.

There are six priorities to continue to make the nuclear option more feasible. First, support of First Mover Initiatives and price of carbon dioxide emissions should occur relatively soon. Second, spent fuel should be moved to federal locations where it can be safely stored for one hundred to one hundred fifty years. Third, Yucca Mountain should not be abandoned as a storage place while interim storage areas are developed. Fourth, a system of global fuel sharing and removal should be developed. Fifth, the administration and Congress should advocate reprocessing of current spent fuel inventories over the next decades. And finally, research and development should continue to evaluate various options for nuclear power deployment and nuclear fuel cycle development.

William Tucker
Author of Terrestrial Energy

Solar energy gives us the energy we need throughout the day in forms of light and heat. That energy is stored in forms of wood, coal, oil, and other natural fuels. Energy can also be harvested from the earth itself. When molten rock comes into contact with ground water it produces steam. Geothermal plants can harness this steam, driving turbines to generate electricity.

About 60 percent of the earth’s heat comes from two radioactive elements, thorium and uranium. These two elements are slowly breaking down and are heating the earth’s core up to 7,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Nuclear power plants use these elements to heat water in order to produce steam to drive turbines. Effectively, nuclear power plants are refined geothermal plants. The goal is to replace coal power with a combination of solar and nuclear or terrestrial energy.

Panel II: Economic and Regulatory Concerns

Christopher Paine
Natural Resources Defense Council

There are thirty-one countries that operate nuclear reactors, but only six countries account for 75 percent of all nuclear power produced. Nuclear power can be used to replace carbon fuel plants in developing countries which might enable these countries to keep carbon dioxide emissions low. However, to keep carbon dioxide levels down in order to prevent the warming of the atmosphere, 700 gigawatts of power must come from nuclear power.

A nuclear revival is not likely because of the large amount of capital needed to construct reactors and plants. Current plants are efficient because no start-up capital is needed. However, the startup capital for building a nuclear reactor may be too high and may prevent a nuclear revival. While the Energy Policy Act is well-intentioned, its results will be delayed and relatively insignificant. There are other, more efficient, ways to decrease power costs. Nuclear power may be one option, but it is not the most economic option.

Paul Joskow
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

At the present, nuclear power accounts for one-fifth of U.S. electricity generation, and while some believe new plants are needed, the amount of electricity generated via nuclear power can be increased by merely “uprating” or refurbishing current plants to be more efficient. Most new reactors can be built at current nuclear sites where public opinion is already open to the idea of nuclear power. This solves the major problem of convincing another segment of the population to embrace nuclear energy.

Richard Myers
Nuclear Energy Institute

The two lessons learned in the last fifteen years of U.S. electricity policy are that a diversified fuel and technology portfolio is essential and that all fuels and technologies, including nuclear, coal, natural gas, and renewable resources have a legitimate role. The challenges of the future are to preserve and restore a diversified energy portfolio, define appropriate roles for various fuels and technologies, and ensure resource adequacy, particularly in competitive markets.

The way nuclear power plants are built today has become vastly superior to the way plants were built in the past. Currently, the process is much more stable. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approves the site and the design, is the sole agency for licensing construction and operation, and conducts cost-benefit analysis before construction. There are also standard NRC certified plant designs. The entire process, from choosing a site all the way to beginning operation, has become more standardized and safer. Unfortunately, current plants are aging and do not operate cleanly or efficiently. New plants need to be built, or at the very least current plants should be uprated with new technology.
 
Keynote Address

Dale E. Klein
Nuclear Regulatory Commission

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has turned its focus to the accomplishment of three long-term goals. The NRC wants to reemphasize its role as a stable regulator of nuclear technology. It plans to do this through reducing the review time of applications for potential new reactors, and encouraging complete and quality submissions of these applications. The process of reviewing applications for proposed new reactors can be prolonged when the application does not meet all of the requirements. The NRC is in the process of increasing staff positions and making crucial organizational changes that will ensure a timely and smooth review of upcoming applications.

The infrastructure of the system also needs to be improved to reintroduce the United States as a competitor of nuclear production in the global scheme. Countries such as China, Russia, and India are expanding their nuclear production, and it is imperative that the United States take a leadership role in this area as well. Currently, many are choosing to purchase nuclear systems from foreign producers, but the global capacity to supply such quality materials is limited.

Finally, there is a need for increased human capital to operate nuclear plants. Half the workers in today’s industry are over the age of forty-seven, and there is competition from other government agencies for these highly skilled workers. Several ways to increase the workforce through upcoming generations are to hold recruitment drives, begin proto-science and -engineering courses at the grade-school level, and increase enrollment in nuclear energy programs at universities. The United States needs to meet the demand for skilled laborers from within its own population and cannot expect to supply this demand from abroad.

Panel III: Next Generation Nuclear

Edward Cummins
Westinghouse Electric

There will be very little change in nuclear reactors between the current and the next generation. The earliest new generation of nuclear reactors could be introduced in 2010, assuming they are already in the process of applying for a constructing and operating license. There is a high demand for innovative technology in the nuclear field, yet there is a need for proven technology as well. These two factors are somewhat contradictory, as by the time a technology is proven, it is no longer “new” or innovative. This is accompanied by the fact that it takes approximately fifteen years to develop a new reactor. The industry, with support from the current administration, has put pressures on the NRC to deal with the uncertainty of the regulatory process. Safety regulations currently in place are the probabilistic risk assessment and the institution of passive safety plants.

Edwin Lyman
Union of Concerned Scientists

There needs to be a significant increase in the safety of nuclear reactors in today’s plants. Current security measures do not protect against possible threats such as terrorism, and plants continually fail tests in which their defense against this type of attack is evaluated. There is an increased risk of nuclear meltdowns in current plants. Power plants are becoming increasingly suburbanized and are no longer located solely in rural areas. Population density is growing in areas of recently proposed plants as well. The theory of “passive safety” does not provide so much a safety solution to plants because its effectiveness has only been tested by paper calculations, and its benefits have yet to be seen in an established power plant.

A study performed on the Indian Point Power Plant, thirty-five miles outside of New York City, showed an increase in the likelihood of thyroid cancer in children within as much as thirty miles from the plant. Nuclear power plants are currently posing significant threats to the health of surrounding populations (in the form of acute radiation syndrome and thyroid cancer) and the natural environment.

Charles Pennington
NAC International

NAC International focuses on the development of a new generation of storage and transport needs for nuclear reactors. There are currently two types of storage technologies in use: wet and dry. Transport protocols for commercial reactors have recently been updated, and a successful licensing system to transport has been put in place. Innovative truck and rail casks are in use to transport dry fuel efficiently and safely.

The long-term threat to the advancement of nuclear technology is the “fear campaign.” Many citizens are ignorant about the benefits of nuclear technology, and are only exposed to the threat of possible radiation. It is essential to the future reputation of the industry that the public be educated against this fear Those who oppose nuclear energy are fervent in their cause, but they should take into account that there are other industries that expose the public to potentially hazardous radiation. The nuclear industry only accounts for a tiny fraction of this threat, and due to new safety protocols, nuclear technological improvements will continue.

AEI interns Andrew Roozeboom and Alexandra Tooley prepared this summary.