I couldn’t help but feel a warm glow of satisfaction over the news that the Obama administration has embraced nuclear power. I know conservatives are going to carp — it doesn’t mean anything, there are still lots of obstacles, the government shouldn’t be funding reactors anyway. All true, all true. But I think this is a big step forward. In the end, it’s going to make an enormous difference for the future of the country.
Just to see how important this is, take a look at the full-page ad on the inside cover of the current issue of The Weekly Standard. There’s a photo of a giant crane setting the bottom portion of the containment vessel in place at a Chinese reactor under construction at Sanmen. “Westinghouse AP1000 on schedule for 2013” says the headline. “In China, four new AP1000s are currently under construction and they are being built in an on-time and on-budget manner,” continues the text.
The Chinese started stepping up their nuclear construction program only four years ago. We’ve been at it since 1955. I happened to be at the Idaho National Laboratory in January 2006 researching my book, Terrestrial Energy, when the Chinese nuclear delegation — including their equivalent of our secretary of energy — came through asking for advice on which reactor to select. I asked Kathryn McCarthy, deputy director of the laboratory, “Do the Chinese still look to us for advice? We haven’t licensed a new reactor here in 30 years.”
“They’re a society that’s still feels more comfortable letting others take the lead,” she responded. “They like us to be on the cutting edge.”
Well that may have been true in 2006, but it’s not anymore. The Chinese went on to buy both the Westinghouse AP1000 and Areva’s European Pressurized Reactor. (Westinghouse is now a Japanese company, Areva is French.) More important, they insisted on getting the specs so they could reverse-engineer the reactors and come up with their own design. They’ve already done that. The Chinese are now building four AP1000s, two EPRs, and 15 more reactors of their own design — 21 in all.
Just to compare, our Nuclear Regulatory Commission hasn’t yet approved the design of the AP1000. (The Vogtle reactors, planned by Southern Electric of Georgia, will be AP1000s.) The NRC granted preliminary approval several years ago, but then asked Westinghouse to elevate a protective shield to guard against attacks by hijacked airplanes. (To see how ludicrous this concern is, take a look at this video. Last week I asked a couple of airline pilots what would happen if they crashed their plane into a reactor. “Planes are built on the beer-can principle,” they said. “The shell is very thin and they maintain their structure because the air is pressurized inside. Once that pressure is released, they’re very fragile. Trying to knock down a nuclear containment with one of these planes would be like trying to knock it down with empty beer cans.”)
Westinghouse returned two years later with an elevated shield. The NRC took one look and said, “Hey, that thing might fall down in an earthquake.” So it’s back to the drawing boards once again.
We’re now years behind the rest of the world in nuclear technology. South Korea entered the field only recently and has already won a $20 billion contract to build four new reactors for the United Arab Emirates. The Koreans get 45 percent of their electricity from nuclear, more than double our 20 percent. Now China is following the same path. Once they get their footing and start selling abroad, all bets are off. In 20 years, they’ll probably be selling mini-reactors in Wal-Mart. But no matter — democracies move slowly. This is the same way we entered World War II. The Germans and Japanese started way ahead of us but once the mighty American industrial machine geared up, we were able to push to the forefront again.
There are still problems, no doubt. Like NRO’s editorial today, Jack Spencer at Heritage argues that loan guarantees will only continue a pattern of “too much government dependence.” True. The best thing to do would be to repeal all government subsidies of energy and let nuclear’s inherent advantage emerge in the marketplace. But that isn’t going to happen. Windmills now get 17 times the operating subsidies of any other form of energy. Half the states are already mandating renewable-energy projects and the Democrats’ climate bill may end up as nothing more than a renewable mandate, as well. At this point, a little pump-priming for nuclear isn’t going to hurt. If Westinghouse and Areva are allowed to build reactors on time and on budget in this country, the loan guarantees will never cost the government a dime.
“But the loan guarantees won’t mean anything without a construction-and-operating license and the NRC can’t issue a license until there has been a ‘waste confidence’ determination,” says C. J. Milmoe, at North Carolina consultant familiar with the workings of Washington. “The Obama administration has already defunded Yucca Mountain, so it’s just taking back with one hand what it’s given with the other. Loan guarantees are desirable, even necessary, but they will not be sufficient to get a new reactor built.”
True enough. But one of these days people are going to realize that basically there is no such thing as nuclear waste. After reprocessing spent nuclear fuel, the resulting “high-level waste” could fit inside a basketball gymnasium. (The French, who have been reprocessing for years, store all their waste from 30 years of producing 70 percent of its electricity beneath the floor of one room that looks very much like a basketball gymnasium.) Given the opportunity, I have no doubt environmental groups will spend decades in court trying to hinder reprocessing as a way of stopping nuclear construction. (It’s known as the “clog the toilet” strategy.) But at some point the public — and maybe even some environmentalists — will wake up to realize that dealing with a few canisters of spent fuel rods is a lot easier and more environmentally benign than trying to fill whole geological formations with liquefied carbon exhaust or covering tens of thousands of square miles with solar collectors or 40-story windmills.
So let’s celebrate the progress that has been made. Nuclear power is the technology of the 21st century. Those countries that embrace it will prosper while those who fear it will find themselves in the position of 18th century Spain when it decided not to embrace the industrial revolution. President Obama has defied his environmental supporters to support nuclear power. The advantages of the technology are so overwhelming, it may take no more than that to get the ball rolling.
– William Tucker is the author of Terrestrial Energy: How Nuclear Power Will Lead the Green Revolution and End America’s Energy Odyssey.
EDITOR’S NOTE: This article has been amended since its initial posting.