Does Nuclear Belong in the Renewable World?

You haven’t heard much from Solar Nation on the subject of nuclear power—pro, con, or impartial. That’s not because we don’t harbor our own views on the use of the technology, but because our focus here is on promoting the positive aspects of solar power, not publicizing the negative aspects of any competitors. Besides, we’re aware that many solar citizens out there may also be strong supporters of nuclear energy as a relatively carbon-free power source.

But we felt it was worth bringing to your attention a report in the May/June issue of EnergyBiz magazine by Pam Radtke Russell, which strongly suggests that the economic underpinnings of the pro-nuclear argument are sagging. Recent cost estimates for two separate nuclear plant proposals in Florida have shown an increase of more than 100% over industry figures that are just two years old. Combined with similar estimates from such sources as Moody’s Investor Service, these figures—attributable largely to rising costs of metals, forgings and labor—represent a significant threat to the viability of the form of power once touted as “too cheap too meter.”

Energy consultant Jim Harding estimates that the operating cost per kilowatt-hour for a new nuclear plant will be in the region of 30 cents for its first dozen years, only dropping to 18 cents after construction costs are paid down. With distributed solar at the low end of this bracket and dropping, and with concentrated solar and wind power estimated at 14 cents per kilowatt-hour, it’s not surprising that some energy companies are backing away from their proposals for new nuclear facilities. Of the seventeen currently in the planning stage, Moody’s only expects one or two to be on line by 2015.

This is an important development, because while the debates on disposal of radioactive waste, vulnerability to terrorist attacks, and large-scale use of fresh water can legitimately be carried on between proponents and opponents, it’s tough to argue with the numbers. And if the real debate is between a clean, renewable source such as solar, which can reach utility scale in some parts of the country, and a more expensive form of power that Wall Street investors won’t even touch, then the nuclear defenders may be running out of arguments.

What’s your take on this debate? Is there room in our energy future for both nuclear and solar power? Assuming we stringently limit our use of fossil fuels in the future, will we be able to satisfy our energy needs without nuclear in the equation, regardless of cost? What solutions are there for those parts of the country that aren’t blessed with generous solar, wind, or other renewable resources?

We’d truly like to hear your thoughts on the issue. Send them to this address, and we’ll report on them in the next issue of Solar Citizen.