Cogito Ergo Non Serviam

NRC Approves America's First Nuke Plants in a Generation

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has signed of on America's first civilian nuclear reactors in a generation. Southern Nuclear Operating Company has received two combined licenses to build two new reactors at its Vogtle site 25 miles from Augusta, Georgia. If all goes according to plan, the two 1.1GW reactors will start operations in 2017. Mixed feelings are entirely in order.

The vote of the NRC was 4-1 in favor of allowing construction of the twin Westinghouse AP 1000 reactors to proceed. The dissenting vote came from NRC Chairman Gregory B. Jaczko. He argued that the licensing would not assure that all of the safety improvements the NRC demanded in the wake of the Fukushima meltdown would in in place before the reactors come online. However, with $4 billion already invested in site preparation, there was significant pressure to get construction started.

According to the Los Angeles Times "The reactor is supposed to have all of the technology and safeguards to avoid a meltdown like the one that occurred at Fukushima, which was hit by a tsunami after a massive earthquake and lost electrical power to keep its reactor cool. The Westinghouse system is supposed to be able to endure a complete blackout and safely shut down the reactor with passive cooling systems, said company spokesman Vaughn Gilbert." And engineers maintain that the AP 1000 is a much better design than anything the US currently has in place -- as it should be after more than 3 decades of technological progress.

On the plus side, nuclear power is carbon-free, and as a result, new nuclear plants will have no negative effect on global climate change. Uranium-235 is cheap (in the rage of $40-60 a pound), and with modern computer-controls, a 21st century plant is far less likely to have operational problems than the 104 US plants currently operating -- using technology from the Nixon years. In addition, the plants mean jobs in a sluggish economy and export opportunities to help the US balance of trade.

Of course, there is a negative side to nuclear power; if not, only people in Ukraine would have heard of Chernobyl and Fukushima would just be another town in Japan. Nuclear accidents are rare, but when they occur, the damage can run into the billions. That is why the nuclear insurance business demands that governments offer guarantees. The true cost of nuclear power in a free market would make it unprofitable. And one hasn't even mentioned nuclear proliferation, waste storage and terrorism.

In an ideal world, the US would have begun weaning itself off oil after the OPEC oil embargo in the 1970s. Solar, wind, geothermal, and hydroelectric would be the standard modes of electricity production. Cleaner coal and natural gas would probably augment these. Instead, the country wasted decades in energy research. The motto was "Drill, baby, drill," not "think, baby, think." These new reactors are the result -- a less-than-optimal move.

© Copyright 2011 by The Kensington Review, Jeff Myhre, PhD, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent. Produced using Ubuntu Linux.



Kensington Review Home