The federal government continues to support innovation in new energy sources, sometimes more successfully than others. Limitations on oil drilling in Alaska or new incentives for hydrogen have been good news. However, now we have the experts on tenterhooks with the new not-so-renewable source they are going to put in place: it costs billions of dollars and is extremely dangerous.
This is the most dangerous energy in the world: America has considered it to be “clean”
The U.S. has recently shifted its stance on the matter through the IRA where it has committed to spending billions of dollars on nuclear energy. This decision has been applauded as a great stride towards the realization of the government’s vision of cutting down on carbon emissions and attaining security of energy.
However, this particular decision should not be applauded as it poses new questions about the safety and feasibility of nuclear power as a source of clean energy. With regards to the nuclear power, the IRA comprises a production tax credit of up to $15 per MWH for any electricity generated on current nuclear reactors.
There is only one credit available for the facility in service in 2024, which extends through 2032, thereby making the existing reactors more cost-efficient in comparison to new generators of power. Furthermore, the law encompasses the provision for a tax credit for advance reactors where a particular kind of reactor may be eligible.
What is the Biden administration trying to do? The most controversial proyect in America
As the aim of this action is to help the current nuclear power stations and to foster the advanced types of reactors, it is important to mention some threats and obstacles of nuclear power. The nuclear power has been associated with a number of safety concerns starting from the times of Three Mile Island to the current day.
In addition, building of new nuclear reactors is very expensive. Some plants are still under construction; for instance, the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant in Georgia, which has been under construction since 2013, and will cost more than $34 billion.
This amount indicates the capital cost of investing in Nuclear energy which is in addition worsened by the fact that nuclear power plants are invariably delayed and in some cases cost more to complete. Do you understand now why are we talking about “the biggest mistake of history in America”?
IRA had the key to develop nuclear energy at large scale, but we didn´t realise
Also, the IRA’s preference of nuclear energy as an environmentally friendly energy source is misplaced. Regarding greenhouse emissions nuclear power has proven efficient in this energy aspect, however there are of course other negative effects on the environment during the production and usage of nuclear energy.
Also, the dependance of the nuclear part on subsidies and government involvement have the potential to put other clean electricity segments such as the wind and solar at a disadvantage. This is not all about safety record and high costs, other issues include.
Recently developed advanced reactors are considered to be one of the crucial pillars of the IRA’s clean energy plan; however, they remain in their experimental stage. It is new and the implementation cost could be very expensive in the short-term and future.
It is clear that the use of nuclear energy responds to America’s need to regain energy sovereignty, compromised by the huge exports we are making to continents like Europe. However, nothing could justify a source that even WWF defines as unsustainable insofar as it pollutes entire ecosystems for more than 20,000 years (not to be confused with fission energy, which we discussed at the time and to whose statements we refer).
