BEYOND NUCLEAR PUBLICATIONS

Search
JOIN OUR NETWORK

     

     

DonateNow

 

 

Nuclear Costs

Estimates for new reactor construction costs continue to sky-rocket. Conservative estimates range between $6 and $12 billion per reactor but Standard & Poor's predicts a continued rise. The nuclear power industry is lobbying for heavy federal subsidization including unlimited loan guarantees but the Congressional Budget Office predicts the risk of default will be well over 50 percent, leaving taxpayers to foot the bill. Beyond Nuclear opposes taxpayer and ratepayer subsidies for the nuclear energy industry.

.................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Monday
Feb152010

Nuclear power industry has spent nearly $650 million in lobbying and $63 million in campaign contributions in past decade alone

The Investigative Reporting Workshop at American University's School of Communication, in collaboration with McClatchy Newspapers, published "Nuclear energy lobby working hard to win support" by Judy Pasternak last month. The article reports that nuclear utilities, labor unions, and other companies with financial interests in nuclear power's expansion have "invested" large sums of money on Capitol Hill in an attempt to win legislative victories to subsidize new reactors, open a national radioactive waste dump at Yucca Mountain, and achieve other industry priorities. In addition, the Obama administration's close ties to Exelon Nuclear, the largest nuclear utility in the U.S., are documented.

Friday
Feb122010

Obama DOE to grant first new atomic reactor federal loan guarantee to Plant Vogtle in Georgia

Dow Jones Newswires has reported, according to sources close to the matter, that the Obama administration's U.S. Department of Energy has decided to grant the first federal taxpayer backed nuclear loan guarantee to the Vogtle Nuclear Power Plant in Georgia. Beyond Nuclear immediately issued a media release, denouncing this transfer of financial risk onto U.S. taxpayers, as well as this creation of radiological risk through DOE financing a reactor design which the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission just last October cited as having a major safety flaw. President Obama is putting such a political priority on this first nuclear power loan guarantee, the Associated Press reports, that he will announce it himself sometime next week. A spokeswoman from Southern Nuclear, beneficiary of the taxpayer-backed loan guarantee, responded “We are excited about the support for our project and for nuclear in general.” This is not change we can believe in. Call President Obama at the White House comment line (202-456-1111) to register your disapproval, then call your two U.S. Senators and your U.S. Representative (via the U.S. Capitol Switchboard, 202-224-3121) to urge them to block President Obama's recent request to triple the nuclear loan guarantee program fund from $18.5 billion to $54.5 billion for financing new reactor construction which otherwise private investors would refuse to touch. Avenging Angels' graphic to the left (used with permission) graced the May 12, 2008 cover of The Nation Magazine, which featured Christian Parenti's excellent article "What Nuclear Renaissance?" As the "Burning Money" graphic indicates, any nuclear power relapse in the U.S. can only be carried out at taxpayers' financial, as well as radiological, risk.

Monday
Feb012010

Nuclear Renaissance "A First Class Train Wreck"

Former NRC Commissioner Peter Bradford has recently called the nuclear "renaissance" at taxpayer expense "a first class train wreck." His recent op-ed to the Madison, Wisconsin Capital Times explains some of the reasons why.

Monday
Feb012010

Nonproliferation Policy Education Center warns that nuclear power subsidies risk worldwide proliferation of nuclear weapons 

Henry Sokolski, Executive Director of NPEC, has warned that U.S. Department of Energy taxpayer-backed loan guarantees for new atomic reactors in the U.S. will set a bad international example that could be followed by foreign governments seeking to conceal nuclear weapon programs behind a nuclear power facade. He points out that a large-scale atomic reactor can generate enough plutonium each year for "scores" of nuclear weapons, if it is chemically separated from radioactive waste. In addition, the enrichment of uranium for nuclear fuel fabrication can be readily diverted for the manufacture of bomb-grade high enriched uranium (HEU).

Monday
Feb012010

"Should Taxpayers Back New Nuclear?"

The National Journal's "Energy and Environment Expert Blogs" is hosting an online debate about taxpayer-backed nuclear power loan guarantees. Voices opposing such a federal subsidy for new reactors span the political spectrum, from environmental groups to conservative think tanks. Opponents and skeptics of new reactor loan guarantees include: former NRC Commissioner Peter Bradford; Ryan Alexander, President of Taxpayers for Common Sense; Janet Larsen, Director of Research, Earth Policy Institute; Henry Sokolski, Executive Director, Nonproliferation Policy Education Center; Ellen Vancko, Nuclear Energy and Climate Change Project manager, Union of Concerned Scientists; David Kreutzer, Senior Policy Analyst in Energy Economics and Climate Change, Heritage Foundation; Bill Snape, Senior Counsel, Center For Biological Diversity; and William O'Keefe, CEO, George C. Marshall Institute.