The Obama administration is determined to make America energy independent. Climate and energy bills are currently making their way through Congress. No single electricity-generating technology can meet America’s future energy needs by itself. However, nuclear energy must play an important role in any plan to meet America’s future energy needs and reduce carbon emissions.
Cost-wise, nuclear energy can be competitive with other sources. Although coal and natural gas plants can be more expensive to build, new nuclear plants will cost $6 billion to $8 Billion. Nuclear energy produces electricity with less fuel and lower operating costs.
The issue of life span is also important. This varies depending upon the technology. It makes a difference when assessing up-front construction costs. Nuclear plants can operate for 60 to 80 years. According to National Wind, a Minneapolis-based developer of large-scale wind farm, the average life span of wind turbines is between 20 and 30 years.
Washington’s aggressive carbon caps will make nuclear energy attractive. Nuclear power plants do not emit carbon. Nuclear plants are also more reliable than solar, wind and biomass generators and require less land.
To be able to replace a nuclear-powered plant, a biomass fuel cultivation zone would need to be bigger than Delaware. A wind farm would have to be 10x larger than Washington D.C. in order to produce the same electricity as a two-unit nuclear power station.
This is what you need to know: The Texas windfarm project T. Boone Pickens recently delayed was estimated to have a cost of $10 billion and occupy 200,000 acres. The $3 billion-$6 billion cost of additional transmission required to transport the energy from the source was not included in this estimate.
Renewable sources of electricity are not able to become primary power sources due to space limitations and reliability problems. Renewable sources of electricity are important in a variety of energy profiles, but nuclear power is necessary to ensure an emission-free future. This position was supported by both a bipartisan majority of the U.S. Congress as well as various environmental groups. Tony Kreindler (media director at the Environmental Defense Fund), put it succinctly in a recent statement. “Given the scope of the climate problem and the emissions problem, we need to look at all the energy options we have, and nuclear is one of them.”
For more information, please visit www.nei.org.
