scholarly journals US nuclear power: The vanishing low-carbon wedge

2018 ◽  
Vol 115 (28) ◽  
pp. 7184-7189 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Granger Morgan ◽  
Ahmed Abdulla ◽  
Michael J. Ford ◽  
Michael Rath

Nuclear power holds the potential to make a significant contribution to decarbonizing the US energy system. Whether it could do so in its current form is a critical question: Existing large light water reactors in the United States are under economic pressure from low natural gas prices, and some have already closed. Moreover, because of their great cost and complexity, it appears most unlikely that any new large plants will be built over the next several decades. While advanced reactor designs are sometimes held up as a potential solution to nuclear power’s challenges, our assessment of the advanced fission enterprise suggests that no US design will be commercialized before midcentury. That leaves factory-manufactured, light water small modular reactors (SMRs) as the only option that might be deployed at significant scale in the climate-critical period of the next several decades. We have systematically investigated how a domestic market could develop to support that industry over the next several decades and, in the absence of a dramatic change in the policy environment, have been unable to make a convincing case. Achieving deep decarbonization of the energy system will require a portfolio of every available technology and strategy we can muster. It should be a source of profound concern for all who care about climate change that, for entirely predictable and resolvable reasons, the United States appears set to virtually lose nuclear power, and thus a wedge of reliable and low-carbon energy, over the next few decades.

Author(s):  
George G. Thomas ◽  
Jack R. Spanner ◽  
Timothy M. Adams ◽  
Siegrid Hall

The commercial Light Water Reactors operating within the United States have been in service from about 20 to 35 years. These plants include buried Service Water piping systems primarily made from low carbon steel. This piping has been subject to aging over the years, resulting in degradation and corrosion that will require replacement of the piping. Due to the advantageous cost and durability of High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) piping (as demonstrated in other commercial industries), the industry has expressed interest in replacing steel buried Service Water Piping in Nuclear Power Stations with HDPE piping. To assist in this effort EPRI has funded and supported the work summarized in this paper to develop design criteria for HPDE Pipe. This paper provides an example problem demonstrating the application of recently developed design criteria for HDPE piping. The technical bases of these criteria are presented in separate papers and are not repeated in this discussion.


A brief look is taken at the status of progress, or the lack of it, towards a quantitative approach to the estimation and assessment of risk for several technologies in the United States. The increase of interest in the consideration of comparative risks in decision-making is also discussed. Finally, a recently proposed trial approach to quantitative safety goals for light-water nuclear power reactors is summarized. The approach is divided into two major tasks: the predominantly social and political task of setting safety criteria, and the technical task of estimating the risks and deciding whether the safety criteria have been met. The safety criteria include the following: limits on hazard states within the reactor; limits on risk to the individual; limits on societal risk; a cost-effectiveness criterion as low as reasonably achievable; a small element of risk aversion.


Author(s):  
John Hanson

The electric power industry in the United States will face a number of great challenges in the next two decades, including increasing electricity demand and the aging of the current fleet of power plants. These challenges present a major test for the industry, which must invest between $1.5 trillion and $2 trillion by 2030 to meet the increased demand. In addition to these challenges, the potential for climate legislation, controversy over hydraulic fracturing, and post-Fukushima safety concerns have all resulted in significant uncertainty regarding the economics of all major sources of base-load electricity. Currently nuclear power produces 22% of the nation’s electricity, and over 70% of the nation’s low-carbon electricity, even though unfavorable economic conditions have stalled construction of new reactors for over 30 years. The economics are changing, however, as evidenced by the recent construction and operating licenses (COLs) awarded by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to Southern Company and SCANA Corporation to build two new units each. The successful construction of these units could lead to more favorable financing for future plants. This improved financing, especially if combined with appropriate additional government support, could provide serious momentum for the resurgence of nuclear power in the United States. The most important way in which government support could benefit nuclear power is by increasing the amount of loan guarantees provided to the first wave of new nuclear power plants. This will help encourage additional new builds, which will help reduce the financing risk premium for new nuclear and improve interest rates for future plants. Instead of simply increasing loan guarantees for nuclear energy, a permanent federal financing structure should be established to provide loan guarantees for “clean energy” technologies in general, a category in which nuclear energy should be included. Most importantly, any changes should be made as part of a coherent, long-term energy policy, which would provide utilities with the correct tools to make the necessary investments, and the confidence that will allow them to undertake large-scale projects.


Energy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 216 ◽  
pp. 119385
Author(s):  
Panagiotis Fragkos ◽  
Heleen Laura van Soest ◽  
Roberto Schaeffer ◽  
Luke Reedman ◽  
Alexandre C. Köberle ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 073112142110246
Author(s):  
Adam Mayer

In the last few decades, the United States has experienced several related and significant societal trends—the transition of the energy system away from coal, the intensification of partisan polarization, and the rise of a populist right-wing political ideology, perhaps best exemplified by the election of Donald Trump. We build Gramling and Freudenberg’s little-explored concept of “development channelization” to argue that nostalgic right-wing populism, grievances directed toward the federal government, and partisanship converge to potentially thwart efforts to transition and diversify rural economies. Populist nostalgia and blame are associated with support for expanding the collapsing coal industry but do not predict support for other types of development. There are patterns of partisan polarization in support for extractive industries and wind power, but many development options appear to be relatively nonpartisan. We discuss these findings in terms of populism, nostalgia, partisan polarization, and the potential for rural renewal in the United States.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document