Nuclear Reactor Closures: Practical, Cost-Effective Solutions Communities and the Climate
WASHINGTON — There is a growing consensus that action needs to be taken immediately to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. Safe-energy organization, Nuclear Information and Resource Service, released a new white paper today: “Nuclear Reactor Closures: Practical, Cost-Effective Solutions for Communities and the Climate.” The White Paper makes a strong case for why nuclear power is not a timely, prudent or economical option to battle climate change, and presents practical, cost-effective strategies for states to manage reactor closures, while protecting local communities and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Click here to listen to a recording of today’s media briefing on the white paper.
The White Paper spells out in detail why nuclear power bailouts would hinder the global fight to combat climate change, and provides practical solutions for phasing out old, uneconomical plants.
The report’s author, Tim Judson , Executive Director of Nuclear Information and Resource Service stated, “A practical assessment of the conditions facing the nuclear industry shows that it is not realistic to assume that nuclear power can or will play a meaningful role in addressing climate change.” Judson added, “A panel of the National Academy of Sciences recently concluded that nuclear power will be incapable of playing a role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the critical mid-century timeframe. Subsidies to aging uneconomical reactors in four states will cost consumers billions of dollars over the next decade, with no ‘exit strategy’ or backup plan. States need practical, cost-effective strategies to plan for and manage reactor closures. We have effective procedures to keep the lights on when power plants shut down, and those can be adapted to meeting emissions goals, as well.”
Damon Moglen, Senior Strategic Adviser from Friends of the Earth, said, “To stop catastrophic climate change, we urgently need to replace dirty and dangerous 20th century fossil fuel and nuclear technologies with safe, clean and cheap greenhouse gas free 21st century renewable energy. Debating whether or not to give billions of dollars in handouts to a few, decrepit 1970-era nuclear reactors for a few more years of operation is nothing but a distraction from the real task at hand—we need to transform our energy economy. We need the equivalent of an Apollo program in renewable energy, not a debate about whether the Edsel should come in a hatchback model.”
Dave Kraft, Director Nuclear Energy Information Services, added, “This white paper identifies a way to manage reactor closures that is more economical, reduces risk, mitigates impacts on communities and workers, protects the environment, ensures compliance with emissions goals, and maximizes opportunities for economic development — all things we fought for in IL but failed to get because of the Exelon bailout.”
Dr Gregory Jaczko, former chairman of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission recently stated. “Nuclear reactors are a bad bet for a climate strategy. Jaczko said new nuclear is a “financial boondoggle”, with investments better placed in solar or wind. “Employing nuclear for climate change is like Dorothy seeking the Wizard of Oz to get home,” he added. “It’s an expensive enticing mirage.”
The report was published by the Nuclear Information & Resource Service in consultation with Alliance for A Green Economy, Citizens Power, Inc., Friends of the Earth, Nuclear Energy Information Service, and Three Mile Island Alert, Inc.
Communications Contact: Erin Jensen, Friends of the Earth, (727) 504-7163, email@example.com
Expert contacts: Tim Judson, NIRS, (301) 270-6477 x:2, firstname.lastname@example.org
Damon Moglen, Friends of the Earth, (202) 352-4223, DMoglen@foe.org
Dave Kraft, Nuclear Energy Information Services, (773) 342-7650, email@example.com