Editorials

Critics of nuclear power - often the same critics of fossil fuels and carbon production - are changing their tactics, assailing the cost of new nuclear power plants rather than the safety.

But those critics are wrong, say Jack Spencer and Nicholas Loris of the Heritage Foundation.

"Carbon-capping legislation and recent studies that conclude that a massive build-up of nuclear power is needed to minimize the negative economic impact of carbon dioxide caps have spurred several high-profile articles on the costs of nuclear energy," the researchers say in a recent study. "One such article notes that estimated construction costs for nuclear power plants and the overall costs of nuclear power have increased significantly since 2000 and espouses wind power, solar power, and energy efficiency as alternatives to new nuclear plants."

But it's not just nuclear power that costs more.

"What these articles do not recognize is that energy prices are increasing broadly," Spencer and Loris say. "When considered properly, nuclear power is the only available technology that is adequate, affordable, reliable, safe, and environmentally clean. If the nation wants to limit emissions, then it must turn to nuclear power."

That will come at a cost, they add.

"Though nuclear energy is expensive and lowering its real costs (as opposed to artificial discounts through subsidies and mandates) should by a primary goal of public policy - especially in light of its critical role in meeting carbon dioxide targets - those who criticize nuclear energy based solely on costs do not fully appreciate the broader context of energy policy, energy inflation, and rising construction costs in general," they say.

Energy prices are rising across the board.

"Much of the increase is a result of rising commodity prices for products like cement, steel, and copper," the researchers report. "The truth is that coal, wind, and solar projects are all becoming increasingly expensive. If those sources were inexpensive, few would even consider building new nuclear plants, yet nearly 20 companies are pursuing construction and operating licenses for up to 30 new reactors. Renewable energy sources would not need mandates and subsidies to survive if they were affordable."

Wind and solar power, the most often mentioned alternatives, are not without problems.

"Wind and solar power do have a role in America's energy mix, but those technologies alone are not ready or able to power the United States," Spencer and Loris say. "Despite efforts to portray these sources as viable alternatives to nuclear power, they have their own problems. They are expensive, intermittent, and inappropriate for broad swaths of the United States. For example, wind turbines are virtually useless in the Southeast, where there is little wind. Even environmental activists are beginning to oppose wind projects because they kill birds, despoil landscapes, and ruin scenic views."

And the environmentalists are turning against solar power, too.

"Solar, Inc., the world's largest solar company, recently told investors that its largest market, the European Union, may ban its solar panels because they contain toxic cadmium telluride. To replace the cadmium model with a silicon-based model would quadruple the production costs," Spencer and Loris say.

The free market should be left to make its own decisions about nuclear power.

"Government has no business making any decisions about nuclear power based on costs," the researchers say. "It is primarily private companies that produce America's power, and consumers pay for it. Their interactions in the marketplace should determine the best way to meet America's energy needs."

Nuclear energy is the only way to reach the goal of reduced carbon emission.

"Nuclear power must be expanded if carbon dioxide caps are to work," Spencer and Loris contend. "Despite claims of high costs, nuclear power is competitive with renewable energy sources when all costs are factored in. The time has come to acknowledge the critical role that nuclear power will play in the United States."

()