WhatFinger


The French use nuclear power why can't America?

America’s Nuclear Power Lag: GOP Initiative Reflects Realities



While President Barack Obama welcomed the “peaceful development” of nuclear power plants in Iran and other countries which do not see themselves as friends of the United States, he and his liberal Democratic colleagues seem intent on killing off the remnants of the nuclear power industry in the United States. Although candidate Obama said he would consider nuclear power use if a reasonable solution can be found to storing nuclear waste, President Obama has taken absolutely no action in developing civilian nuclear power. The comprehensive energy program of the Democratic Congress, the Waxman-Markey bill does not even mention nuclear power.

Support Canada Free Press


The state of nuclear power today in America is much different than 40 years ago when according to William Tucker, who has written about energy issues for the past 25 years, the United States was the home of the leading companies in nuclear reactor construction. Three companies, General Electric, Westinghouse, and Babcock & Wilcox experienced a “nuclear boom” until the Three Mile Island event and subsequent activism essentially put a halt to new reactor construction. The activism was triggered not only by a fear of accidents but also of creating so much potential nuclear weapons material that would lead to nuclear weapons proliferation. Yet world wide today, nuclear power is more than a significant producer of electricity without carbon emissions or major accident at market prices competitive to other forms of generation. Nuclear fuel rods still contain high amounts of potentially usable material after they are spent. By the 1970s the reprocessing technology of spent nuclear fuel rods was capable of creating a substantial amount of weapons grade materials to a degree that the American President, Jimmy Carter, called for a suspension of the further development of this key process. Reprocessing of fuel allows the ore to be reused somewhat but does not prevent the need for storage of nuclear waste. Refinements in technology and procedure have allowed this process to reuse much of the nuclear material and also to make less weapons grade material as a by product. Although many countries in Europe joined the United States initially in stopping the construction of nuclear power plants, Italy, Great Britain, Sweden, and France especially reversed course soon after. Over 75% of France’s energy demand is met by nuclear power. The worlds leading builder of nuclear power plants is a French company, Areva. Their European Pressurized Reactor is considered the leading contender for possible new American power plants. Japan Steel Works is the only company in the world now making necessary components, “exquisitely machined pressure vessels”, for the core of nuclear reactors. Meanwhile in the United States, Tucker reported in February that many companies seeking to build nuclear reactors did not have confidence in General Electric the only U.S. company capable of building reactors. Because of the low activity in America, very few nuclear engineers, technicians, and specialty construction workers are available to build plants. Today the Republicans in Congress announced the American Energy Act will put nuclear power on a fast track. U.S. Congressman Mike Pence (R-IN), Chairman of the American Energy Solutions Group announced the goal of the legislation is to license 100 new nuclear power plants of the next 20 years as well as assuring a safe and secure storage for spent nuclear fuel. The new energy plan would not be based upon subsidies but instead would require that nuclear energy is economically competitive in a market based system. To create a better permitting system which currently can take more than four years, the bill proposes creating for the first time a comprehensive regulatory body for nuclear energy called National Nuclear Energy Council. Rather than having various disjointed agencies oversee the process all aspects of nuclear power and reactors would be centrally regulated through this body. Jack Spencer, the Research Fellow in Nuclear Energy in the Thomas A. Roe Institute which is a part of the Heritage Foundation reported the following as being key in the American Energy Act as regards nuclear power. Since no nuclear power plants have been built in the United States for the last 30 years, the bill would propose lifting of tariffs for a five year period to allow the importation of nuclear components not made in America. This is only a temporary lifting because the ultimate goal is to develop a viable and competitive American nuclear industry once again. While Japan, France and many other countries reprocess nuclear fuel the current U.S. policy is not to recycle it. The bill will start a program in the Department of Energy to award contracts to companies in the private sector to develop nuclear fuel reprocessing. The Obama administration determined that nuclear waster storage at Yucca Mountain was not tenable before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission formally finished its review of the permit to build a repository there. The new energy act would have the Nuclear Regulatory Commission complete the review and would also specify that the limits of the repository’s storage capacity be based upon science and engineering rather than Congressional mandate which may be considerably less. The truth is that America cannot achieve economic independence without substantially increasing and improving nuclear power. The lack of activity has almost killed our domestic capability to build nuclear power plants which should be seen as a strategically important industry. While states like Texas and California can achieve significant percentages of renewable energy, many others will not be able to get over single digits. If fossil fuels, biomass, and bio-fuels are ruled out because of carbon emissions than either we build nuclear power plants or give up living with electricity. America cannot remain a strong economic and military power with a viable economy without nuclear power. If we do not reverse course we run the danger of falling to far behind to catch up.


View Comments

Dr. Tony Magana -- Bio and Archives

Dr. Tony Magana was raised in McAllen Texas, attended Texas A&M;University, and holds a doctorate from Harvard University. He has served in the United States Army Reserve. He is a member of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists.


Sponsored