Reviving Nuclear Power: A Tall Order
The Trump administration is attempting to breathe new life into the US nuclear power industry with a series of executive orders. These orders aim to streamline reactor approvals and boost experimental reactor construction. However, the reality on the ground tells a different story. Currently, no new nuclear plants are under construction, and approved designs remain unused. Since the 1990s, only three new reactors have been activated, signaling a stagnation in the industry. Despite nuclear power’s low carbon footprint, its future remains uncertain. The administration’s ambitious plan to have three new reactors operational within a year seems overly optimistic, if not implausible.
The Nuclear Industry’s Rocky Past
The golden era of nuclear plant construction in the US was the 1970s and 80s, but incidents like the Three Mile Island meltdown soured public opinion. Since then, the industry has struggled with high costs and lengthy construction delays. Safety regulations, often blamed for these issues, are only part of the problem. A lack of a robust supply chain for reactor components also contributes to delays. Recent safety concerns, highlighted by the Fukushima disaster, have further complicated matters. While startups propose new, safer designs like small modular reactors (SMRs), only one has been approved in the US, and its planned installation was canceled due to cost concerns.
Economic Challenges and Unrealistic Goals
Investing in nuclear power is risky, especially when natural gas, wind, and solar offer cheaper alternatives. The Trump administration’s orders, issued quietly before a holiday weekend, include some unrealistic goals. For instance, they call for the construction of 10 new large reactors by 2030 and the reopening of economically unviable plants. The orders also propose using military bases to bypass regulatory hurdles, but this strategy raises questions about feasibility and safety. Despite these challenges, the administration hopes to change the current landscape, though sincerity and practicality remain in doubt.
Regulatory Reform: A Double-Edged Sword
The executive orders also target the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), blaming its structure for stalling nuclear development. The orders propose hard time limits for approvals and call for ‘science-based radiation limits,’ despite a lack of evidence for current regulation flaws. While some ideas, like a single certification process for modular reactors, are sensible, the focus on deregulation overlooks larger issues. The real barriers to nuclear resurgence are economic and logistical, not just regulatory. Without significant government investment, nuclear power’s trajectory in the US is unlikely to change dramatically.
Key Facts Worth Knowing
- •Only three new nuclear reactors have entered service in the US since 1990.
- •The 1979 Three Mile Island incident significantly impacted public perception of nuclear power.
- •Small modular reactors (SMRs) are designed to be safer and more economical.
- •A robust supply chain is crucial for reducing nuclear construction delays.
- •Nuclear power’s low carbon footprint is often overshadowed by its high economic costs.
