Nuclear renaissance in the United States

Last updated
George W. Bush signing the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which offered incentives for US nuclear reactor construction including cost-overrun support up to a total of $2 billion for six new nuclear plants. Critics allege its primary purpose was to permit fossil fuel holding companies to monopolize utility generation. 2005 Energy Policy Act.jpg
George W. Bush signing the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which offered incentives for US nuclear reactor construction including cost-overrun support up to a total of $2 billion for six new nuclear plants. Critics allege its primary purpose was to permit fossil fuel holding companies to monopolize utility generation.

Between 2007 and 2009, 13 companies applied to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for construction and operating licenses to build 31 new nuclear power reactors in the United States. However, the case for widespread nuclear plant construction has been hampered due to inexpensive natural gas, slow electricity demand growth in a weak US economy, lack of financing, and safety concerns following the Fukushima nuclear accident at a plant built in the early 1970s which occurred in 2011. [3] [4]

Contents

Most of the proposed 31 reactors have been canceled, and as of August 2017 only two reactors are under construction. [5] [6] [7] [8] In 2013, four reactors were permanently closed: San Onofre 2 and 3 in California following equipment problems, Crystal River 3 in Florida, and Kewaunee in Wisconsin. [9] [10] Vermont Yankee, in Vernon, was closed on Dec. 29, 2014.

In March 2017, the last remaining U.S.-based new nuclear company, Westinghouse Electric Company, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy because of US$9 billion of losses from its U.S. nuclear construction projects. [11] [12] Later that year construction of two reactors of their AP1000 design at V.C. Summer was canceled due to delays and cost overruns [8] raising questions about the future of the two remaining US reactors under construction, since these are also of the AP1000 design. [13]

As of 2021, the private sector focus has shifted toward the development of small modular reactors (SMRs), which could theoretically cut down on the high costs and lengthy construction times of conventional nuclear plants. NuScale Power is the only company thus far to have been granted regulatory approval for an SMR design from the NRC, however. [14] Both Presidents Donald Trump and Joe Biden have proposed or helped pass legislation that would increase subsidies for new and existing nuclear plants. [15]

Overview

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 offered the nuclear power industry financial incentives and economic subsidies that, according to economist John Quiggin, the "developers of wind and solar power could only dream of". The Act provides substantial loan guarantees, cost-overrun support of up to $2 billion total for multiple new nuclear power plants, and the extension of the Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act through to 2025. The Act was promoted as a forerunner to a "nuclear renaissance" in the United States, with dozens of new plants being announced. [16]

Others saw the Act, which repealed the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 (PUHCA), as an attempt by oil and gas interests to monopolize utility generation through deregulation. Former Federal Energy Regulatory Commission administrator Lynn Hargis noted in 2005 that "PUHCA prohibits the re-creation of the huge holding companies (the Power Trusts) that grew up in the 1920s and ‘30s, when three utility holding companies owned nearly half of all the electric utilities in the country." She correctly predicted that repealing PUHCA would lead to "massive consolidation of utility ownership." [17] [18] Within one year of PUHCA's August 2005 repeal the spot price of natural gas had dropped by 26%, [19] creating a financial incentive for utilities to abandon nuclear generation in favor of natural gas. Many license applications filed with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for proposed new reactors were suspended or cancelled. [6] [7]

As of 2020, the plans for 31 new renaissance reactors in the United States have resulted in two reactors beginning construction, a third reactor being commissioned, and two additional reactors, Virgil C. Summers Units 2 and 3 in South Carolina, beginning construction before being canceled. Vogtle units 3 and 4 are the two new units and occupy an existing nuclear site. The other construction likewise occupies an existing site at Watts Bar, but had been 80% built from 1973 to 1985, with the final 20% occurring from 2007 to 2015. [20] [21] Matthew Wald from the New York Times has reported that "the nuclear renaissance is looking small and slow". [22]

In 2008, the Energy Information Administration projected almost 17 gigawatts of new nuclear power reactors by 2030, but in its 2011 projections, it "scaled back the 2030 projection to just five". [23] A survey conducted in April 2011 found that 64 percent of Americans opposed the construction of new nuclear reactors. [24] Yet five months later a survey sponsored by the Nuclear Energy Institute found that "62 percent of respondents said they favor the use of nuclear energy as one of the ways to provide electricity in the United States, with 35 percent opposed". [25]

Construction of two Westinghouse AP1000 reactors underway at Vogtle Electric in 2011 Construction at Vogtle Nuclear Plant.jpg
Construction of two Westinghouse AP1000 reactors underway at Vogtle Electric in 2011

As of December 2011, construction by Southern Company on two new nuclear units (Vogtle 3 & 4) has begun, and they are expected to be delivering commercial power by 2016 and 2017. [26] [27] In the wake of Fukushima, experts at the time saw continuing challenges that they felt would make it difficult for the nuclear power industry to expand beyond a small handful of reactor projects that "government agencies decide to subsidize by forcing taxpayers to assume the risk for the reactors and mandating that ratepayers pay for construction in advance". [28]

As of 2014, the U.S. nuclear industry began a new lobbying effort, hiring three former senators — Evan Bayh, a Democrat; Judd Gregg, a Republican; and Spencer Abraham, a Republican — as well as William M. Daley, a former staffer to President Obama. The initiative is called Nuclear Matters, and it has begun a newspaper advertising campaign. [29]

As of August 2017 locations of new US reactors and their scheduled operating dates are:

On March 29, 2017, parent company Toshiba placed Westinghouse Electric Company in Chapter 11 bankruptcy because of $9 billion of losses from its nuclear reactor construction projects. The projects responsible for this loss are mostly the construction of four AP1000 reactors at Vogtle in Georgia and V. C. Summer in South Carolina. [11] The U.S. government had given $8.3 billion of loan guarantees on the financing of the four nuclear reactors being built in the U.S., and it is expected a way forward to completing the plant can be agreed. [12] Peter A. Bradford, former Nuclear Regulatory Commission member, commented "They placed a big bet on this hallucination of a nuclear renaissance". [30] The National Review characterised the U.S. nuclear industry as being in "deep crisis". [31]

As of 2017, the U.S. shale gas boom has lowered electricity generation costs placing severe pressure on the economics of operating older existing nuclear power plants. [32] The Nuclear Energy Institute has estimated that 15 to 20 reactors are at risk of early closure for economic reasons. [33] Nuclear operators in Illinois and New York have obtained financial support from regulators, and operators in Connecticut, New Jersey, Ohio and Pennsylvania are seeking similar support. [32]

A 2017 assessment put rising nuclear construction costs, low gas prices and improving renewable generation economics as the three main causes of the failure of the nuclear renaissance in the United States. [34]

In 2019, former Department of Energy Deputy Secretary, Daniel Poneman, released a book on nuclear power discussing the need for an “all-of-the-above” energy policy that advances the goal of decarbonizing the environment through all available means, specifically, nuclear power. Poneman argues that the United States should work to enhance the ability of nuclear power to combat climate change even as we reduce the risks of nuclear terror. [35] Others, including James Hansen, [36] Bret Kugelmass, [37] and Joshua S. Goldstein, have echoed those points. [38] According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), low-carbon energy sources must account for 85% of global electricity generation by 2040 (up from 36% in 2019) to stave off the worst effects of climate change. IEA advocates for nuclear energy as the most feasible option for meeting that goal. [39] The Washington, D.C.-based research institute, Energy Impact Center, has set the goal of completely decarbonizing the global economy by 2040 using primarily nuclear energy. [40] The center is also responsible for the nuclear energy- and climate-related podcast, Titans of Nuclear . [41]

This renewed interest in nuclear power as a climate change mitigation tool has led to efforts aimed at speeding up construction time and reducing costs of power plants. [42] In 2020, the Department of Energy awarded $80 million each to TerraPower and X-energy as part of its Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program. [43] Both companies are developing small modular reactor (SMR) projects which are theoretically easier and more inexpensive to build than traditional plants. [14] Similarly, the Energy Impact Center developed OPEN100, another SMR project introduced in 2020 that has published open-source blueprints for the design and construction of a nuclear power plant with a pressurized water reactor. [40] As of 2023, however, the only company to be granted regulatory approval from the NRC for its SMR design is NuScale Power, but in November 2023 its first deployment project, the Carbon Free Power Project in Idaho, was cancelled because of cost increases leading to some of its members withdrawing. This raised concerns about the commercial prospects in the U.S. of the other SMR designs. [44] [45]

Detailed history

Nuclear power has proved controversial since the 1970s. Highly radioactive materials may overheat and escape from the reactor building. Toxic, radioactive waste (spent nuclear fuel) needs to be regularly removed from the reactors and disposed of safely for up to a million years, so that it does not pollute the environment. Recycling of nuclear waste has been discussed, but it creates plutonium which can be used in weapons, and in any case still leaves much unwanted waste to be stored and disposed of. Large, purpose-built facilities for long-term disposal of nuclear waste have been difficult to site, and have not yet reached fruition. [46] Specific controversies, and projects which have not proceeded according to plan, include:

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nuclear Regulatory Commission</span> Government agency of the United States

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is an independent agency of the United States government tasked with protecting public health and safety related to nuclear energy. Established by the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, the NRC began operations on January 19, 1975, as one of two successor agencies to the United States Atomic Energy Commission. Its functions include overseeing reactor safety and security, administering reactor licensing and renewal, licensing radioactive materials, radionuclide safety, and managing the storage, security, recycling, and disposal of spent fuel.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indian Point Energy Center</span> Nuclear power plant in Buchanan, New York

Indian Point Energy Center (I.P.E.C.) is a now defunct three-unit nuclear power station located in Buchanan, just south of Peekskill, in Westchester County, New York. It sits on the east bank of the Hudson River, about 36 miles (58 km) north of Midtown Manhattan. The facility permanently ceased power operations on April 30, 2021. Before its closure, the station's two operating reactors generated about 2,000 megawatts (MWe) of electrical power, about 25% of New York City's usage. The station is owned by Holtec International, and consists of three permanently deactivated reactors, Indian Point Units 1, 2, and 3. Units 2 and 3 were Westinghouse pressurized water reactors. Entergy purchased Unit 3 from the New York Power Authority in 2000 and Units 1 and 2 from Consolidated Edison in 2001.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Callaway Nuclear Generating Station</span> Nuclear power plant located in Callaway County, Missouri

The Callaway Plant is a nuclear power plant located in Callaway County, Missouri. The plant is Missouri's only nuclear power plant and is close to Fulton, Missouri. The 2,767 acres (1,120 ha) site began operations on December 19, 1984. It generates electricity from one 1,190-megawatt Westinghouse four-loop pressurized water reactor and a General Electric turbine-generator. The Ameren Corporation owns and operates the plant through its subsidiary Ameren Missouri. It is one of several Westinghouse reactors designs called the "Standard Nuclear Unit Power Plant System," or SNUPPS.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">North Anna Nuclear Generating Station</span> Nuclear power plant in Louisa County, Virginia

The North Anna Nuclear Generating Station is a nuclear power plant on a 1,075-acre (435 ha) site in Louisa County, Virginia, in the Mid-Atlantic United States. The site is operated by Dominion Generation company and is jointly owned by the Dominion Virginia Power corporation (88.4%) and by the Old Dominion Electric Cooperative (11.6%).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Watts Bar Nuclear Plant</span> Nuclear power plant in Rhea County, Tennessee

The Watts Bar Nuclear Plant is a Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) nuclear reactor pair used for electric power generation. It is located on a 1,770-acre (7.2 km²) site in Rhea County, Tennessee, near Spring City, between the cities of Chattanooga and Knoxville. Watts Bar supplies enough electricity for about 1,200,000 households in the Tennessee Valley.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Vogtle Electric Generating Plant</span> Nuclear power plant in Burke County, Georgia, US

The Alvin W. Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, also known as Plant Vogtle, is a four-unit nuclear power plant located in Burke County, near Waynesboro, Georgia, in the southeastern United States. With a power capacity of 4,536 megawatts, it is the largest nuclear power plant and second-largest power station in the United States. It is also the only nuclear plant in the country with four units. It is named after a former Alabama Power and Southern Company board chairman, Alvin Vogtle.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Generating Station</span> Nuclear power plant located near Jenkinsville, South Carolina

The Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Power Station occupies a site near Jenkinsville, South Carolina, in Fairfield County, South Carolina, approximately 20 miles (32 km) northwest of Columbia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">South Texas Nuclear Generating Station</span> Nuclear power plant in Matagorda County, Texas

The South Texas Project Electric Generating Station, is a nuclear power station southwest of Bay City, Texas, United States. STP occupies a 12,200-acre (4,900 ha) site west of the Colorado River about 90 miles (140 km) southwest of Houston. It consists of two Westinghouse Pressurized Water Reactors and is cooled by a 7,000-acre (2,800 ha) reservoir, which eliminates the need for cooling towers.

The "Nuclear Power 2010 Program" was launched in 2002 by President George W. Bush in 2002, 13 months after the beginning of his presidency, in order to restart orders for nuclear power reactors in the U.S. by providing subsidies for a handful of Generation III+ demonstration plants. The expectation was that these plants would come online by 2010, but it was not met.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">AP1000</span> American pressurized water cooling nuclear reactor design

The AP1000 is a nuclear power plant designed and sold by Westinghouse Electric Company. The plant is a pressurized water reactor with improved use of passive nuclear safety and many design features intended to lower its capital cost and improve its economics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nuclear power in the United States</span> Power source providing US electricity

In the United States, nuclear power is provided by 92 commercial reactors with a net capacity of 94.7 gigawatts (GW), with 61 pressurized water reactors and 31 boiling water reactors. In 2019, they produced a total of 809.41 terawatt-hours of electricity, which accounted for 20% of the nation's total electric energy generation. In 2018, nuclear comprised nearly 50 percent of US emission-free energy generation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant</span> Nuclear power station in Texas

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant is located in Somervell County, Texas. The nuclear power plant is located 40 miles (64 km) southwest of Ft. Worth and about 60 miles (97 km) southwest of Dallas. It relies on nearby Comanche Creek Reservoir for cooling water. The plant has about 1,300 employees and is operated by Luminant Generation, a subsidiary of Vistra Corp.

The William States Lee III Nuclear Station was a planned two-unit nuclear power plant in Cherokee County, South Carolina. Duke Energy filed the Combined Construction and Operating License (COL) application for the plant on December 13, 2007 to the NRC. On December 19, 2016, the NRC issued two Combined Licenses authorizing Duke to build and operate two AP1000 reactors at the site.

The Levy County Nuclear Power Plant was a proposed nuclear power plant in Levy County, Florida. Progress Energy Florida originally estimated that the reactors would cost $5 billion and would commence operation in 2016. It later became clear that the Levy County reactors would not have started operation until at least 2026. Since Progress filed its application for the new plant in 2008 demand for electricity had been growing very slowly, and natural gas prices were extremely low at the time. The utility estimated that the reactors would cost between $17 billion and $22 billion, not counting financing charges and cost overruns. According to economist Mark Cooper, opposition to the project has mounted, threatening a rerun of the 1970s and 1980s, when the majority of nuclear construction plans were canceled or abandoned.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">NuScale Power</span> American nuclear technology company

NuScale Power Corporation is a publicly traded American company that designs and markets small modular reactors (SMRs). It is headquartered in Portland, Oregon. A 50 MWe version of the design was certified by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in January 2023. The current scalable 77 MWe SMR VOYGR design was submitted for NRC review on January 1, 2023, and is currently about a third complete.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Small modular reactor</span> Small nuclear reactors that could be manufactured in a factory and transported on site

Small modular reactors (SMRs) are a class of small nuclear fission reactors, designed to be built in a factory, shipped to operational sites for installation and then used to power buildings or other commercial operations. The first commercial SMR was invented by a team of nuclear scientists at Oregon State University (OSU) in 2007. Working with OSU's prototype, NuScale Power developed the first working model, available to the US market, in 2022. The term SMR refers to the size, capacity and modular construction. Reactor type and the nuclear processes may vary. Of the many SMR designs, the pressurized water reactor (PWR) is the most common. However, recently proposed SMR designs include: generation IV, thermal-neutron reactors, fast-neutron reactors, molten salt, and gas-cooled reactor models.

GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) is a provider of advanced reactors and nuclear services. It is headquartered in Wilmington, North Carolina, United States. Established in June 2007, GEH is a nuclear alliance created by General Electric and Hitachi. In Japan, the alliance is Hitachi-GE Nuclear Energy. In November 2015, Jay Wileman was appointed CEO.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nuclear energy policy of the United States</span> Overview of the nuclear energy policy in the United States of America

The nuclear energy policy of the United States began in 1954 and continued with the ongoing building of nuclear power plants, the enactment of numerous pieces of legislation such as the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, and the implementation of countless policies which have guided the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Department of Energy in the regulation and growth of nuclear energy companies. This includes, but is not limited to, regulations of nuclear facilities, waste storage, decommissioning of weapons-grade materials, uranium mining, and funding for nuclear companies, along with an increase in power plant building. Both legislation and bureaucratic regulations of nuclear energy in the United States have been shaped by scientific research, private industries' wishes, and public opinion, which has shifted over time and as a result of different nuclear disasters.

This is a history of nuclear power as realized through the first artificial fission of atoms that would lead to the Manhattan Project and, eventually, to using nuclear fission to generate electricity.

References

  1. ↑ Quiggin, John (8 November 2013). "Reviving nuclear power debates is a distraction. We need to use less energy". The Guardian.
  2. ↑ Hargis, Lynn (September 2003). "PUHCA for Dummies: An Electricity Blackout and Energy Bill Primer" (PDF). Public Citizen.
  3. ↑ Rascoe, Ayesha (Feb 9, 2012). "U.S. approves first new nuclear plant in a generation". Reuters.
  4. ↑ Sovacool, BK and SV Valentine. The National Politics of Nuclear Power: Economics, Security, and Governance (London: Routledge, 2012), p. 82.
  5. ↑ Peter A. Bradford. Delivering the nuclear promise, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists , June 2016.
  6. 1 2 Eileen O'Grady. Entergy says nuclear remains costly Reuters, May 25, 2010.
  7. 1 2 Terry Ganey. AmerenUE pulls plug on project Archived 2012-07-13 at the Wayback Machine Columbia Daily Tribune, April 23, 2009.
  8. 1 2 Plumer, Brad (31 July 2017). "U.S. Nuclear Comeback Stalls as Two Reactors Are Abandoned". The New York Times . Retrieved 2 August 2017.
  9. 1 2 Mark Cooper (18 June 2013). "Nuclear aging: Not so graceful". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
  10. 1 2 Matthew Wald (June 14, 2013). "Nuclear Plants, Old and Uncompetitive, Are Closing Earlier Than Expected". New York Times.
  11. 1 2 Fuse, Taro (24 March 2017). "Toshiba decides on Westinghouse bankruptcy, sees $9 billion in charges: sources". Reuters. Retrieved 25 March 2017.
  12. 1 2 Tom Hals, Makiko Yamazaki, Tim Kelly (30 March 2017). "Huge nuclear cost overruns push Toshiba's Westinghouse into bankruptcy". Reuters. Retrieved 31 March 2017.{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  13. ↑ "The Fate of America's Nuclear Future Rests on One Utility". fortune.com. 1 August 2017. Retrieved 2 August 2017.
  14. 1 2 Parshley, Lois (May 4, 2021). "The controversial future of nuclear power in the U.S." National Geographic. Archived from the original on May 4, 2021. Retrieved November 21, 2021.
  15. ↑ Meyer, Robinson (November 10, 2021). "Nuclear Is Hot, for the Moment". The Atlantic. Retrieved November 21, 2021.
  16. ↑ John Quiggin (8 November 2013). "Reviving nuclear power debates is a distraction. We need to use less energy". The Guardian.
  17. ↑ "PUHCA Repeal for Dummies - The Sequel" (PDF). Public Citizen. June 2005.
  18. ↑ "The Coming Wave of Utility Consolidation/work". Investing Daily. 27 July 2012.
  19. ↑ "Henry Hub Natural Gas Spot Price". U.S. Energy Information Administration (eia). Feb 10, 2016 [weekly]. Retrieved 12 Feb 2016.
  20. ↑ Matthew L. Wald (December 7, 2010). Nuclear ‘Renaissance’ Is Short on Largess The New York Times .
  21. ↑ "Team France in disarray: Unhappy attempts to revive a national industry". The Economist. December 2, 2010.
  22. ↑ Matthew L. Wald. (September 23, 2010). "Aid Sought for Nuclear Plants". Green. The New York Times.
  23. ↑ Mark Cooper (July 2011). "The implications of Fukushima: The US perspective". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. 67 (4): 8–13. doi:10.1177/0096340211414840. S2CID   146270304.
  24. 1 2 M. V. Ramana (July 2011). "Nuclear power and the public". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. 67 (4): 44. Bibcode:2011BuAtS..67d..43R. doi:10.1177/0096340211413358. S2CID   144321178.
  25. 1 2 "Americans' Support for Nuclear Energy Holds at Majority Level 6 Months After Japan Accident". PR Newswire. 3 October 2011.
  26. ↑ "Archived copy of Southern Nuclear". Archived from the original on 2010-09-28. Retrieved 2012-01-21.
  27. ↑ "Archived copy Southern Nuclear". Archived from the original on 2011-12-10. Retrieved 2012-01-21.
  28. ↑ "Experts: Even higher costs and more headaches for nuclear power in 2012". MarketWatch. 28 December 2011.
  29. ↑ Matthew Wald (April 27, 2014). "Nuclear Industry Gains Carbon-Focused Allies in Push to Save Reactors". New York Times.
  30. ↑ Christopher Martin, Chris Cooper (31 March 2017). "How an American tech icon bet on nuclear power — and lost". Bloomberg. Retrieved 2 April 2017.
  31. ↑ Carl, Jeremy (3 August 2017). "Keeping the Lights on at America's Nuclear Power Plants". National Review. Retrieved 5 August 2017.
  32. 1 2 Levy, Marc (11 April 2017). "Nuclear plant owners expand search for rescue to more states". Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Archived from the original on 10 April 2017. Retrieved 11 April 2017.
  33. ↑ Kidd, Steve (7 April 2017). "The future of the nuclear sector - is innovation the answer?". Nuclear Engineering International. Retrieved 12 April 2017.
  34. ↑ Kidd, Steve (1 December 2017). "Nuclear economics - a perpetual challenge?". Nuclear Engineering International. Retrieved 15 December 2017.
  35. ↑ "Daniel B. Poneman". The MIT Press. Retrieved 2019-08-29.
  36. ↑ Biello, David (December 12, 2013). "How Nuclear Power Can Stop Global Warming". Scientific American. Retrieved November 21, 2021.
  37. ↑ Kugelmass, Bret (January 22, 2020). "Want to stop climate change? Embrace the nuclear option". USA Today. Retrieved November 21, 2021.
  38. ↑ Goldstein, Joshua S.; Qvist, Staffan A. (January 11, 2019). "Only Nuclear Energy Can Save the Planet". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved November 21, 2021.
  39. ↑ Johnson, Jeff (September 23, 2019). "Can nuclear power help save us from climate change?". Chemical & Engineering News. Retrieved November 21, 2021.
  40. 1 2 Dormehl, Luke (March 5, 2020). "Someone just uploaded open-source nuclear power plant blueprints to the web". Digital Trends. Retrieved November 21, 2021.
  41. ↑ Menser, Paul (February 7, 2018). "SILICON VALLEY STARTUP PRO SHIFTS FOCUS TO NUCLEAR ENERGY". Idaho National Laboratory. Retrieved November 21, 2021.
  42. ↑ Cho, Renee (November 23, 2020). "The State of Nuclear Energy Today — and What Lies Ahead". State of the Planet. Retrieved November 21, 2021.
  43. ↑ "U.S. Department of Energy Announces $160 Million in First Awards under Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program". United States Department of Energy. October 13, 2020. Retrieved November 21, 2021.
  44. ↑ Cho, Adrian (10 November 2023). "Deal to build pint-size nuclear reactors canceled". Science. Retrieved 11 November 2023.
  45. ↑ Kemp, David; Van Doren, Peter (10 November 2023). "Nuclear Power's Newest Cautionary Tale". Cato Institute. Retrieved 11 November 2023.
  46. ↑ Congressional Research report, Nuclear Energy: Overview of Congressional Issues, CRS Report, 2015.
  47. ↑ "Energy rules have Virginia weighing new nuclear reactor at North Anna".
  48. ↑ "Six nuclear protesters arrested at North Anna plant visitors area". Richmond Times/Dispatch. August 7, 2008. Retrieved 2017-08-02.
  49. ↑ TVA plan for Ala. nuclear plant drops to 1 reactor
  50. ↑ Matthew L. Wald. Aid Sought for Nuclear Plants Green, September 23, 2010.
  51. ↑ Letter from Michael J. Wallace, Constellation Energy, to US Department of Energy Deputy Secretary Dan Poneman, October 8, 2010. [ dead link ].
  52. ↑ "Dominion's 3rd-quarter net income declines". WTOP Radio. Oct 29, 2010. Retrieved 2010-11-10.
  53. 1 2 Christian Parenti (April 18, 2011). "Nuclear Dead End: It's the Economics, Stupid". The Nation.
  54. ↑ NRG ends project to build new nuclear reactors
  55. ↑ Matthew L. Wald (April 19, 2011). "NRG Abandons Project for 2 Reactors in Texas". New York Times.
  56. ↑ Ivan Penn (January 26, 2012). "Progress Energy looking to cancel main construction contract for building Levy County nuclear plant". Tampa Bay Times.
  57. ↑ "Exelon scraps Texas reactor project". Nuclear Engineering International. 29 August 2012. Archived from the original on 29 January 2013.
  58. ↑ Matthew L. Wald. A Nuclear Giant Moves Into Wind The New York Times , August 31, 2010.
  59. ↑ "Top climate change scientists' letter to policy influencers". CNN.com. 3 November 2013.
  60. 1 2 Mark Cooper (July 18, 2013). "Renaissance in reverse" (PDF). Vermont Law School. Archived from the original (PDF) on January 14, 2016.
  61. ↑ Matthew L. Wald (August 1, 2013). "Florida Nuclear Project Is Dropped". The New York Times. Retrieved August 3, 2013.
  62. ↑ PennIvan Penn (August 1, 2013). "Duke Energy to cancel proposed Levy County nuclear plant". Tampa Bay Times. Retrieved August 3, 2013. In May, the Times reported that, over a 60 year lifespan, the Levy plant would cost more than an equivalent natural gas plant under any reasonable scenario.
  63. ↑ "Levy nuclear plant project shelved". World Nuclear News. 2 August 2013. Retrieved 5 August 2013.
  64. ↑ "Nine Mile Point COL lodged". World Nuclear News . 2 October 2008. Retrieved 8 October 2008.
  65. ↑ "Effort to build new Lake Ontario nuke plant halted". The Wall Street Journal . Associated Press. 6 December 2013. Retrieved 6 December 2013.
  66. ↑ "U.S. Support for Nuclear Energy at 51%". 30 March 2015.
  67. ↑ "Watts Bar Completion". Bechtel. Retrieved 11 February 2016.
  68. ↑ "First American Nuke Plant In 21st Century To Open Soon". Forbes .
  69. ↑ "Obama Administration Announces Actions to Ensure that Nuclear Energy Remains a Vibrant Component of the United States' Clean Energy Strategy". whitehouse.gov . 6 November 2015 – via National Archives.
  70. ↑ Wilks, Avery G.; Brown, Andrew (2020-07-31). "3 years later: How the fallout from SC's $9 billion nuclear fiasco continues". Post and Courier. Archived from the original on 2020-12-25. Retrieved 2020-12-25.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.