https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2019/10/24/failing-nuclear-industry-pushing-23-billion-federal-bailout
[If nuclear fission is such a great solution for cost-effective,
environmentally-friendly electricity generation, why does it need
another financial bailout (US$23 billion this time), and why can't the
industry provide us with their plan for safe disposal of spent fuel and
other nuclear waste? Safeguarding radioactive waste for tens of
thousands of years is not going to be a trivial energy or financial
cost, and neither is addressed by the industry to date or in this latest
bail-out plan.
If we really cared about climate change or the environment or human
health, how could we better invest US$23 billion?
According to IRENA's 2018 report
(https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2019/May/IRENA_Renewable-Power-Generations-Costs-in-2018.pdf
- see Key Findings), onshore wind power (global average) is estimated at
$0.049 (less than 5 cents) per kWh and $0.055 (less than 6 cents) for
PV. Recent auctions in North America for PV long-term contracts have
been below $0.04 (4 cents) per kWh. Using 5 cents as an average, $23
billion could buy almost 20 GW a year for 25 years, or roughly 460 GWh
of zero-emissions electricity, or about 30 conventional nuclear
reactor's lifetime generation worth (all calculations approximate).]
Failing Nuclear Industry Pushing for $23 Billion Federal Bailout
A bailout proposed by the nuclear industry would cost tax and ratepayers
billions, while starving demand for wind and solar.
WASHINGTON - As the nuclear industry lobbies Congress for a bailout, a
new analysis commissioned by Friends of the Earth shows that their
favored tax proposal would entail massive costs for taxpayers,
ratepayers and the climate. Even using the most optimistic projection,
the direct costs to taxpayers totals $23 billion over ten years and $34
billion over 20 years.
“The dying nuclear industry wants a massive bailout at the expense of
taxpayers and the climate,” said Lukas Ross, Senior Policy Analyst for
Friends of the Earth. “With just a decade left to prevent the worst of
the climate crisis, we shouldn’t dump more money into ancient nuclear
reactors at the expense of cleaner and much cheaper renewables.”
This new subsidy would add to over half a century of massive government
support for the nuclear industry. The exact proposal would create a new
30 percent investment tax credit for existing nuclear reactors based on
their refueling and capital costs. Utility giant Exelon, the largest
nuclear operator in the country, is lobbying hard to include this
proposal as a possible tax extender.
“Subsidizing nuclear keeps reactors on-line and crowds out the
alternatives. It slows the transition to an electrical grid based on
low-carbon distributed resources,” wrote expert Dr. Mark Cooper, the
author of the analysis and Senior Fellow for Economic Analysis at the
Vermont Law School’s Institute for Energy and the Environment. “Nuclear
power has no role to play in the long-term future of a low carbon
electricity sector.”
The burden to regular ratepayers and the climate would be significant as
well. Keeping aging, expensive reactors online instead of replacing them
with clean renewables blocks the transition to a low-cost, low-carbon
energy future — a delay that would cost regular electricity consumers
$33 billion over the next 20 years.
“Stumbling from one bailout to the next isn’t a business model,” added
Ross. “For the sake of taxpayers, electricity consumers and the climate,
Congress must stop this endless nuclear boondoggle.”
--
Darryl McMahon
Freelance Project Manager (sustainable systems)
=====================================
To subscribe, unsubscribe, turn vacation mode on or off,
or carry out other user-actions for this list, visit
https://www.freelists.org/list/keiths-list
Note: new climate change website is now in pre-launch
Visit https://www.10n10.ca/e/index.shtml