Energy Subsidies: Nuclear
We read a great deal about how clean nuclear power is with regard to CO2 emissions. Thus, we are told that this is a good investment. Is it?
The problem with all of the subsidies, and renewables are not exempt from this argument, is that those who argue for them tend to ignore the total cost of the program and the hidden subsidies that they receive. I think that Nuclear is probably one of the worst in terms of ignoring real costs vs. benefits.
First, Nuclear power has a limit on the liability risk that it has to carry in case of an accident. The total liability for a single accident is limited to approximately $500 million.
Now, there have been claims with regard to safety risk with regard to wind and solar….but let’s be real. If a wind turbine breaks, it is certainly a risk to the immediate surroundings. If a nuclear power plant has a serious accident…and we know that this can happen, I think that I am on safe ground to say that the risk is millions of times greater.
So why do we subsidize the nuclear industry? This is a long story. But the idea of “Power to Cheap to Meter” was on everyone’s mind. Clearly this has not happened.
And let’s not even get into the long term disposal requirements….Paid for partly with tax dollars….
Did you know that some radioactive waste must be stored for over 200,000 years to be safe? I mean really. How arrogant is the assumption that any society will be around to safeguard something for that long?
Heck, the New York Times reported recently on the trial of an 82 year old nun who broke into one of the most secure nuclear storage facilities in the country!!