Quick question for my (government high school) forensics class:
Why have no new nuclear power plants been built here (the us) for about 30 years? secondly, what regulations on building currently prevent new generation 3 plants from being built?
From what I have read, it seems the reason of safety is the main concern with nuclear power plants. Everyone wants a power source with no downside, but that kind of fairytale world does not exist. Every power source has one downside or another, with nuclear power seeming to have the lowest one. Reading up on wikipedia may help you.
Due to regulations, it takes something like twice as long to build a nuke plant here than in France (!).
Mises Community Natural Rights Discussion Group
krazy kaju: Due to regulations, it takes something like twice as long to build a nuke plant here than in France (!).
Meanwhile, the very same agencies that place restrictions on private power plants, test-detonate their stuff in the deserts of Nevada, and nobody sees anything wrong!
downwinders.org
"As long as there are sovereign nations possessing great power, war is inevitable."
Your question has a number of answers.
1) Increased political weight of "green" movements. We've talked a lot about this movement, its origins and its goals, so let's focus on the political side of it. While hardcore green movements are very small indeed their influence is more widespread than you may think. Politicians may be arrogant, selfcentered egomaniacs but know this very well. And one of the lessons they learned is to mention nuclear power as little as possible. Al Gore is the most famous example: very few "gorettes" know that part of his "war on Global Warming" revolves around building as many nuclear power plants as possible.
2)Coal and oil are still considerably cheaper than nuclear energy. When everything is taken into account a single MW/h produced using coal, natural gas or oil in a high-tech powerplant is still a full 30% cheaper than the same MW/h produced using latest generation nuclear powerplants. Wind and solar power are much, much more expensive than nuclear power, particulary when large outputs are involved.
3)No private company would build a nuclear poweplant today. Present day corporations have grown so addict to government largesse that they are not ready to risk the large sums involved. Of course if the State would build the plant itself they would be more than ready to step in as minority associates... The funny thing is that while General Electric and Westinghouse (to name but the two most famous companies involved in the nuclear power business) are researching and marketing more advanced, safer and more efficient nuclear reactors using funds from the US Department of Energy. The irony is that while US citizens will be denied the benefits of these more advanced powerplant, a former "rogue state" (India) will.
4)Do not ignore local population resistance. Nobody wants a nuclear powerplant next door. Of course, you can build it in the middle of a desert but it would cost even more and do not forget green activists claiming that a God-forsaken rock is a beautiful and delicate ecosystem. Of course you can follow the French approach to make it more acceptable: give local communities generous tax-breaks and additional benefits in form of "reserved" jobs, new hospitals, better road etc. But this raises even more ethical questions.
Yes, it's time for the Dr Goebbels show!
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap