WASHINGTON -- Nuclear technology companies, emboldened by congressional approval for Yucca Mountain and other favorable factors want to build new nuclear power plants in the United States within five years.
That is the message at a three-day "Nuclear Renaissance" conference that began Tuesday in the nation's capital, where nuclear technology company executives have gathered to discuss a new age of nuclear power production in America.
Several said the time is right for building new power plants. No new plants have been ordered in this country since before the Three Mile Island accident in 1979, due to public fears, and a combination of economic, regulatory and waste factors.
The reasons to move ahead now are clear, the executives said: As the nation's economy continues to grow and global warming worsens, America will need more emissions-free power. The nation also now has a pro-nuclear president that seems committed to building new plants -- and dealing with nuclear waste.
Several attendees said no companies would be talking new plants if lawmakers this year had not approved Yucca Mountain as the nation's nuclear waste dump.
"The failure of Congress to act would have been a significant obstacle," said Ernie Kennedy, Westinghouse vice president for new plants.
Westinghouse is one of a handful of nuclear technology companies that intend to be involved in designing and constructing a new generation of plants in America.
The nuclear industry first buzzed over a nuclear renaissance after President Bush was inaugurated and during the California energy crisis. Since then, the excitement has ebbed.
Hurdles remain. Utility companies are still wary of investing in new nuclear plants in part because natural gas and coal plants still produce cheaper power than nuclear plants, and gas plants are cheaper to build.
But ultimately, nuclear plants can be competitive, especially with the fluctuating cost of gas, industry insiders said. It's "realistic" that new plants could be licensed and constructed within the next decade, said Tony Pietrangelo, director for licensing for the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry trade group.
Still, another hurdle is the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's new nuclear plant licensing process, recently streamlined but as-yet unnavigated, executives said. That creates some uncertainty for companies whose shareholders prefer sure-bet projects, several executives said.
While Congress helped pave the way with Yucca Mountain approval, "Economics are the bottom line," Westinghouse's Kennedy said. "It comes down to: What's the most effective, cost-efficient supply of electricity for the country?"
The conference was sponsored by nuclear technology companies AECL, Excel Services Corp., Framatome ANP, and Chicago-based law firm Winston & Strawn. The law firm's energy practice lawyers used to handle Yucca project legal work for the Energy Department. But the firm last year resigned amid controversy that the firm had a conflict-of-interest -- it also had lobbied in favor of Yucca for the industry group NEI.
Doubters of the nuclear renaissance abound. While market experts are skeptical about nuclear's economic viability, environmentalists generally say nuclear energy is not efficient or cost-effective because it produces dangerous waste that is expensive to store.
"It's an old, dirty technology, and I really believe that the industry is going to have difficulty siting any new plants," said Wenonah Hauter of Public Citizen, the only environmentalist invited to speak at the conference.
And Nevada lawmakers have long scoffed at the industry's push for new plants because they believe Yucca Mountain is a dangerous place to store waste.
"The industry has got to find a solution to the question of waste, other than geologic burial," Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., said. Gibbons supports the concept of nuclear power, but abhors the Yucca plan.
"Deep geological burial will be the death of nuclear power in this country," Gibbons said. "It's the wrong kind of solution for their problem."
Still, companies are quietly vying to be among the first to build new U.S. plants.
AECL Technologies, Inc., with offices in Washington and a parent company in Canada, has engaged in preliminary planning with the plant-licensing Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said AECL's David Torgerson, senior vice president for technology.
The department is working closely with the industry to pave the way for more plants as part of the department's Nuclear Power 2010 program, first unveiled in February. The program's goal: to help nuclear companies establish at least one new U.S. plant in the next eight years.
"We think the technology can stand on its own, and we think the utilities are interested," said Gail Marcus, an Energy Department deputy director and president of the American Nuclear Society. "It's an ambitious program, but it's doable."
Marcus said the "renaissance" still has momentum, spurred in part by the Yucca decision.
"It's was a real factor," she said. "Everybody (utilities) said that unless we have a path forward on Yucca Mountain, nobody will place new orders."
archive