Advanced Search
May 20, 2010
Experience has shown that the construction of nuclear reactors takes longer and costs more than initial estimates. For these reasons, private investors have not been interested in backing new nuclear construction without federal loan guarantees, placing most of the financial risk and burden of default on U.S. taxpayers. Furthermore, nuclear energy today relies on technologies and a system of national governance of the nuclear fuel cycle that carry substantial risks of nuclear weapons proliferation. Policymakers are faced with weighing the challenges of ensuring responsible use of taxpayer dollars and preventing nuclear weapons proliferation when considering new nuclear reactors as a climate solution.
On May 20, 2010, the Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI) held a briefing to examine what the economic and proliferation risks of new nuclear reactors mean for nuclear power’s role in addressing climate change. Many U.S. policymakers believe nuclear energy will play a critical role in future power generation, especially if legislation is passed that places a price on carbon. In fact, the Senate climate legislation released on May 12 includes $54 billion in loan guarantees and other subsidies for the new construction of nuclear reactors. Additionally, the U.S. Department of Energy recently offered an $8.3 billion loan guarantee for the two reactors to be built in Georgia (the utility has yet to accept the guarantee). President Obama’s FY 2011 budget requests an additional $36 billion in loan guarantee authority for new reactors. Yet new reactors entail serious financial and proliferation risks. This briefing addressed what ramping up nuclear power production to address climate change would mean for U.S. taxpayers and national security.