ENERGY Secretary Steven Chu turned NIMBYism on its head recently when he told National Public Radio listeners that he would rather live close to a nuclear power plant than to a coal-fired power plant.
The nuclear energy industry’s safety record, Chu said, is “really very, very good.’’
The substance and timing of Chu’s comments are important, since the United States is at a crossroads with regard to energy policies. In the coming decades, we will witness dramatic change in the way electricity is produced and distributed, all while enhancing protection of our environment.
Electricity is the backbone of our nation’s economy, and the availability of reliable, affordable supplies has helped make it possible for Americans to achieve a standard of living envied and sought after around the world.
Electricity is such an extricable part of our lives that, even with improved efficiency measures and amid the current economic downturn, our nation’s need for electricity - including clean, reliable sources such as nuclear energy - continues to climb.
Recent analyses have concluded that the nation’s use of nuclear energy must increase in the coming decades to meet rising electricity demand and dramatically reduce emissions of greenhouse gases linked to the threat of climate change.
The Environmental Protection Agency, for example, in its June analysis of the Waxman-Markey climate change bill found that the contribution of low- or zero-carbon energy technologies to electricity supply would increase from the current level (14 percent) to 26 percent by 2020 and 38 percent by 2050. Meeting the bill’s 2050 carbon reductions, which will be driven by a cap and trade system on carbon emitters, including coal-fired power plants, will require as many as 187 new nuclear energy facilities, EPA said.
Similarly, the National Academy of Sciences concluded in a July report, that substantial reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from the electricity sector are achievable through a portfolio approach that includes nuclear energy. The report identifies new-generation nuclear energy and coal-fired generators with carbon capture and sequestering capacity as two “key technologies’’ that must be demonstrated during the next decade “to allow for their widespread deployment starting around 2020.’’
In a 2008 study commissioned by the Nuclear Energy Institute, Boston-based Polestar Applied Technology found that the continued operation of New England’s five nuclear plants and an unprecedented expansion of electricity generation from wind farms will be needed to meet the emissions limits established for 2019 under the Northeast’s Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.
No single technology can independently slow and reverse increases in carbon emissions. But these studies confirm nuclear energy is an indispensable part of a comprehensive approach that, encouragingly, is identified in energy and climate change bills pending in the Congress.
The Waxman-Markey bill and a Senate renewable energy bill do this by establishing a Clean Energy Deployment Administration, which would function as a permanent financing platform to provide loans, loan guarantees, and other credit support for clean-energy technologies, including renewable energy and new nuclear energy facilities.
US manufacturers, some of them located in New England, will benefit because construction of new nuclear power plants will create demand for commodities like concrete and steel and hundreds of components, large and small. A single new nuclear power plant requires approximately 400,000 cubic yards of concrete, 66,000 tons of steel, 44 miles of piping, 300 miles of electric wiring, and 130,000 electrical components.
Consumers of the electricity generated by new nuclear plants benefit because the loan guarantee program allows lower-cost financing, so the plant delivers lower-cost electricity.
Talk about a win-win situation: good-paying, long-term employment opportunities coupled with the reliable, low-carbon electricity supplies that we need.
Economic impact studies show that the average nuclear power station generates approximately $430 million a year in total output for the local community, and nearly $40 million in total labor income. The average plant also generates approximately $20 million annually in state and local taxes, and about $75 million annually in federal taxes.
New England’s five reactors produce about 25 percent of the region’s electricity. Nationally, 104 reactors reliably and affordably generate one-fifth of electricity needs. As we strive in upcoming decades to meet rising electricity demand and curb emissions of greenhouse gases, nuclear energy’s usefulness will continue to grow.
Marvin Fertel is president and CEO of the Nuclear Energy Institute. 
