RESOURCE CENTER

NUCLEAR POWER: A GREEN TECHNOLOGY

Download: Nuclear Power: A Green Technology [PDF]

NUCLEAR POWER: A GREEN TECHNOLOGY

BY: DANIEL P. LAGATTA, PHD FOUNDING PRINCIPAL, GEI CONSULTANTS, INC.

World leaders gathered in Copenhagen for the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference to address the need for global policies that aim to minimize global warming by reducing carbon emissions due to industrial growth. Achieving the goal of a worldwide reduction in carbon emissions will depend in part on our ability to significantly increase the use of carbon-free electric power sources. While wind, solar, biofuel, hydroelectric, and geothermal power sources are all being discussed, nuclear power remains the most viable option for reducing carbon emissions on a global scale while maintaining anticipated future electric energy requirements.

Controversy surrounding nuclear power has relegated this option to the background on some political stages, even taking a back seat to the more headline-friendly considerations of wind and solar power during President Obama’s “Clean Energy” speech in October at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. However, nuclear power currently supplies the United States with about 20 percent of its electric energy needs and 68 percent of all carbon-free electricity. As energy demands continue to rise over the next 30 years – possibly a 30 percent increase in required generating capacity by 2035 according to the Energy Information Administration’s Annual Energy Outlook 2009 - no other carbon-free energy source will likely be able to grow at the rate necessary to meet that demand.

WATER, WIND, SUN

Even with reasonable future increases to the current levels of wind, hydro and solar energy supplies, real barriers exist to limit an increase of any or all of these sources to the levels that will be required to meet future demand. Although hydroelectric power was the single largest contributor to non-carbon emitting electric power generation from a renewable source in 2008, it still only provided 9.4 percent of our generation capacity and because of constraints due to water availability, approximately six percent of our total energy use. Due to environmental constraints and site limitations it is unlikely that this source of renewable electric power will grow significantly and it will become a smaller percentage of our overall generating capacity.

It has been projected that wind turbine-generated electricity will be able to contribute seven to ten percent of the United States’ energy supply in 2035. This increase in capacity would require the construction of approximately 37,000 3 Mw new wind turbines. Standing approximately 300 feet tall with a rotor diameter of nearly 260 feet the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that a 25 Mw wind farm requires up to 1,500 acres of land. The large size and great numbers of turbines needed to capture wind energy suggest that there is likely to be environmental opposition to the construction of a large number of major wind farms, hence the growth of wind farms may be slower than presently anticipated. Similarly, while it is likely that solar energy technology will advance in the near future, solar sources only provided approximately two-tenths of one percent of our electric generation in 2008 and it is unlikely that it will provide more than a few percent of our needs by 2035.

Despite these challenges, we must continue to support wind and solar energy sources to improve our renewable energy portfolio and provide diversity to our energy supply. In fact, we need to continue to improve all sources of renewable energy. But renewable energy will simply not be enough. While wind, solar, biofuels, hydro, and geothermal combined provide about 13.5 percent of our present generating capacity, it is unlikely that they could provide more than 20 percent of our 2035 generating capacity.

CLEANER COAL

In 2008, coal-fired plants provided 30 percent of our generating capacity. This sector will continue to provide a large portion of our generating capacity in 2035, but its proportion of our total capacity will diminish because the construction of new coal-fired plants will not equal the growth needed. If carbon assessment is instituted, a number of less efficient coal plants will be retired, further increasing our need for additional new plant generation.

Technology to reduce CO2 emissions of existing coal-fired plants is progressing with sequestration (the storage of CO2 in underground reservoirs). The U.S. Geological Survey concludes that there is technical capability to store CO2 in underground reservoirs; however industrial infrastructure larger than the size of the current U.S. natural gas and petroleum industry may be required to accomplish our goals of reducing CO2 emissions from coal-fired plants. Given the scale of the task, utilities will be occupied with reducing the carbon emissions of existing fossil fuel plants before many new plants are built.

NATURAL GAS

A bright spot in the U.S. energy portfolio is the recent increase in natural gas supplies extracted from deep shale deposits due to an advanced hydraulic fracturing production technique that enables more efficient gas extraction. Natural gas provided 41 percent of our generating capacity in 2008 and over the past few years has been the fastest growing generating capacity. However, high natural gas prices have prevented these plants from being used to their full capacity and it is difficult to predict if gas prices will continue to experience such fluctuations in the future.

In spite of its large generation capacity, according to a Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory study in 2008, only 17 percent of the electric energy used in the U.S. came from natural gas plants. This may change with the new-found abundance of natural gas and may lead to the “cleanest” of the fossil fuel sources contributing a larger portion of our energy needs.

THE NUCLEAR SOLUTION

Nuclear power will help solve our carbon-free electric energy needs. With only 10 percent of our installed capacity, nuclear power has consistently and safely contributed approximately 20 percent of the electrical power used in the U.S. over the past 30 years. Because of its high reliability and low production cost, nuclear power has been and will continue to be a major means of carbon-free generation.

To maintain the same percentage of generating capacity in 2035 as nuclear power provided in 2008, approximately forty new nuclear plants would need to be constructed. Nuclear power plants have a high capital cost and a long permitting, design and construction lead time. However, there are no new nuclear plants licensed for construction at this time.

Disposal of spent nuclear fuel is a political lightning rod. For those concerned about the disposal of spent fuel, it needs to be recognized that spent fuel is currently safely stored at most of the 104 operating plants. In addition, it is estimated that there is sufficient such storage for the next 50 to 100 years. Since long-term central storage has been solved in several European countries, it is reasonable to assume that in the time available, the U.S. will also identify a safe central storage facility or alternative means of dealing with spent fuel.

Finally, to the concern that redeveloping a nuclear industry in the U.S. could lead to nuclear proliferation, it should be pointed out that in the rest of the world, there are presently 50 nuclear power plants under construction. It appears to be only the U.S. that is not aggressively seeking to use nuclear power as a non-carbon emitting source of electricity.

In addition to aiding in the reduction of generated CO2 and its impact on global warming, a strong, viable U.S. nuclear industry would have a positive influence on the U.S. economy. Each nuclear plant creates approximately 4,000 construction jobs and approximately 400 permanent jobs when in operation. These are high-paying jobs that cannot be sent overseas. Supporting industries also create thousands of additional U.S. manufacturing jobs and are a boost to our manufacturing capabilities.

In a bipartisan effort to advance climate change legislation, Senator John Kerry (D-MA) and Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) have written: “Nuclear Power needs to be a core component of electric generation if we are to meet our emission reduction targets.”

While the Federal government has provided financial incentives for the development of renewable energy sources, it should also provide equivalent financial incentives for the initial development of a new generation of nuclear power plants. The result will be significant dividends that include the reduction of CO2 emissions and the development of a major “green” energy industrial program that will create thousands of new U.S. manufacturing jobs.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Dr. LaGatta is a founding Principal of GEI Consultants, Inc. and has been a consultant to providers of electric power for over 35 years. His experience includes providing services for hydro, wind, fossil and nuclear power generation projects. He received his M.S. and Ph.D. from Harvard University (1970).

AUTHOR’S CONTACT INFORMATION: Daniel P. LaGatta, Ph.D. GEI Consultants, Inc. 400 Unicorn Park Drive Woburn, MA 01801 phone: 781-721-4000 dlagatta@geiconsultants.com

TO ORDER REPRINTS:

Kelly Cohane

GEI Consultants, Inc.

400 Unicorn Park Drive

Woburn, MA 01801

phone: 781-721-4078

kcohane@geiconsultants.com

No part of this document may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying or facsimile, without permission in writing from GEI Consultants, Inc.