“Inevitable nuclear power exit” in U.S.? Bulletin of Atomic Scientists exposes “dismal” and “extremely unattractive” situation

Published: March 1st, 2013 at 11:44 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
17 comments


Title: US may face inevitable nuclear power exit
Source: Physorg
Date: March 1, 2013

[...] The Obama administration injected significant funding into two new nuclear reactor projects in Georgia in 2012. But this investment—the first of its kind in three decades—belies an overall dismal US nuclear power landscape. [...] According to former Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commissioner Peter Bradford, current market forces challenge the economic viability of existing nuclear power plants, with new reactors representing an extremely unattractive investment prospect.

Allowing existing reactors to simply run out their licensed lifetimes in the current scenario, nuclear power may simply disappear, he writes. “Absent an extremely large injection of government funding or further life extensions, the reactors currently operating are going to end their licensed lifetimes between now and the late 2050s,” Bradford concludes. “They will become part of an economics-driven US nuclear phase-out a couple of decades behind the government-led nuclear exit in Germany.”

Also in this special issue, Sharon Squassoni, a non-proliferation expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC, writes that a US nuclear phase out will have only minor international implications. Governmental attempts to buoy the US commercial nuclear industry for national security reasons run the risk of blurring the distinction between civilian and military nuclear programs, undermining public backing for both, she adds. [...]

Colorado-based Rocky Mountain Institute chairman and chief scientist, Amory Lovins, says [...] “The inevitable US nuclear phase-out, whatever its speed, is […] just part of a far broader and deeper evolution” [...]

More Information: Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

Also from today: Top Economist: Nuclear power is over -- "Frankly I think from a business perspective it’s over, I think it’s over... here's the situation" (VIDEO)

Published: March 1st, 2013 at 11:44 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
17 comments

Related Posts

  1. ‘The Daily Show’ is going nuclear: Nuclear industry will use program for ad campaign that claims to display value of atomic power — Trying to target younger audience -Bloomberg March 20, 2012
  2. Top Economist: Nuclear power is over — “Frankly I think from a business perspective it’s over, I think it’s over… here’s the situation” (VIDEO) March 1, 2013
  3. Local TV: Nuclear plant shuts down after “own in-house system” lost power due to blizzard — NRC: Pilgrim lost off-site power — 3 feet of snow in some parts of Boston area (VIDEO) February 9, 2013
  4. AP: Some Leaders in U.S. Souring on Nuclear Power Costs — Tea Party, conservatives, Republicans fed up with soaring budgets March 3, 2013
  5. U.S. Nuclear Expert: We are currently experiencing a cyber attack — Email system also compromised February 1, 2013

17 comments to “Inevitable nuclear power exit” in U.S.? Bulletin of Atomic Scientists exposes “dismal” and “extremely unattractive” situation

  • TheBigPicture TheBigPicture

    Every country is downwind from someone's nuclear plant. Totally unacceptable. They must be decommissioned, worldwide.


    Report comment

  • Mack Mack

    Again, the 8.26% of nuclear energy consumed in the US is not worth the risks, pollutions, cancers, and dangerous waste inherent with nuclear energy.

    And as Sharon Squassoni said in the article:

    "…a US nuclear phase out will have only minor international implications."


    Report comment

  • Johnny Blade

    Awww,too bad,so sad :( -While it "sounds" like good news to those of us who understand enough about the issue to know the nuclear power industry alone is poised to kill us all if it hasn't already gone beyond the point of hopelessly contaminating the Earth beyond it's ability to allow nature's repair mechanisms to work their wonders via the disasters & projected rise in radiation levels even if the efforts to regain control of Fukushima and breakthroughs in technology to deal with the massive piles of nuclear waste byproducts were successful in the near future(?)!!
    By allowing them to continue operating NPP's at or usually above the output levels they were designed for when they were NEW until 2050,2070,or even 2020 for that matter-the next "BIG-ONE" will render the gesture a moot point and we will all be FUKuD-up beyond chelation,remediation & decontamination and the likelihood that we'll be alive to see them all shut down without "something else" shutting them down along with EVERYONE & EVERYTHING else first under the conditions I can only imagine as an apocalyptic nightmare beyond the worst horror/disaster/ELE, sci-fi novel scenario anyone ever came up with(??)!!~ I truly HATE thinking about,dreaming about & looking at the crap streaming images of Fukushima more than anything foul that's ever preyed on my mind and it's wearing down my soul and will to go on living if what's been forced on us even qualifies as a "life"(?)!~ :| ~**


    Report comment

  • nedlifromvermont

    Note to Jeff Immelt, CEO, GE,: Save what is left of your soul and order a worldwide stand down for this crap industry, that just isn't worth it … not that it ever was … Make the Break!

    Nuclear fission power on a large scale was never necessary, smart, safe, cheap or good … it's been one series of lying, bald-faced cover up, rule by threat, mob-based, Ponzi schemes from the start.

    What part of this message is so hard for you to comprehend?

    peace …


    Report comment

  • razzz razzz

    Told you nuclear power generation wouldn't fail because nuclear fallout is killing people. Nuclear power generation will fail because they can't make a profit from killing people with nuclear fallout.

    Without Congress's blessing the free market would cease nuclear power generation due to liability costs alone besides cleanup costs and there is no amount of money to make nuclear power generation safe.

    It's a hope and a prayer that no earthquake strikes, tsunami rolls in, floodwater rises to high, power grid can't be maintained and any other numerous unforeseen natural or unnatural events occur to knock out a nuclear plant.

    I think GE, Westinghouse and others saw the writing on the wall during this 50+ years of splitting atoms to boil water experiment because they started selling off parts of their nuclear divisions.


    Report comment

    • Johnny Blade

      Yet the same MF'ers who designed & built the faulty,flimsy NPP's and whose greed,irresponsibility and incompetence will be the ones who will get the contracts to clean up their own expense with the taxpayers & their electric bills footing the entire bill!! They'll still be raking in money from the monster they created long after they shut down the NPP's while the radiation levels will remain & likely to climb even higher as the disaster releases continue leaking,spreading until it permeates every layer of our environment with entire countries and perhaps continents will never be as they were or as nature & evolution intended if habitable by ANYTHING alive at all!! So damned sick & tired of their BS already!! …. :| ~**


      Report comment

  • We Not They Finally

    Shame on Obama for giving ANY money to the nuclear industry. And now he wants to send former First Daughter Caroline Kennedy to Japan as Ambassador? He would NOT send his own First Daughters –would never happen. We are appalled and horrified.


    Report comment

    • jec jec

      Wonder what Hillary thinks.she is the person who signed all the agreements with post-fukushima Japan. If her daughter goes over, sadly, we will probably have a few more datapoints. I always did like her daughter..sweet young lady..and an only child for the Clintons. They may have problems with the health of any future grandchildren……


      Report comment

    • ion jean ion jean

      Caroline needs a reminder of these words:

      "In a July 1963 speech televised to the nation Kennedy urged Senate ratification of the test ban treaty: "The number of children and grandchildren with cancer in their bones, with leukemia in their blood, or with poison in their lungs might seem statistically small to some, in comparison with natural hazards, but this is not a natural health hazard–and it is not a statistical issue. The loss of even one human life, or malformation of one baby–who may be born long after we are gone–should be of concern to us all. Our children and grandchildren are not merely statistics towards which we can be indifferent."[40]


      Report comment

    • jec jec

      Well..at least THAT containment vessel will never be used..one would hope..like a big cracked bell…BUSTED! Love it.


      Report comment

    • Sickputer

      Makes you wonder why if America is SO GOOD at building nuclear plants (not) why did they have to have the Savannah reactor vessel built 7,000 miles away in South Korea?

      So they can get a big tax break?

      Even if the vessel itself breaks on a creaky railroad track.

      Lot of bumps on a 7,000 trip even without falling off a railcar.


      Report comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.