Costs Threaten Nuclear Power

Nuclear power appears to be an increasingly expensive proposition. Those looking to invest in alternative energy may find nuclear to be more cost-prohibitive than other options, says Lester R. Brown, president of the Earth Policy Institute.

Costs include the decommissioning of nuclear power plants when they are worn out - a massive and expensive undertaking. According to the World Nuclear Association, it is common for plants to build in a decommissioning fund during the life of a facility by including it in the price of the electricity they produce. Construction and fuel expenses are also on the rise. Brown points out that this increase reflects the paucity of skilled engineers and construction workers in a "fading industry."

The price of uranium has skyrocketed in the past decade as well, although some speculate that increased production and enrichment may cause the price to decrease. Accident insurance adds to the overhead. Companies are required to purchase the maximum coverage - $300 million per reactor - although critics claim that even this amount is inadequate to cover the risks.

Nuclear waste disposal is also costly, and Brown points out that the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository in the United States is billions of dollars over budget and almost 20 years behind schedule.

"Originally slated to start accepting waste in 1998, it is now set to do so in 2017, assuming it clears all remaining hurdles," Brown notes. Currently, spent nuclear fuel is stored in more than 100 temporary facilities (mostly on-site) in 39 states. However, some experts argue that the spent fuel can be recycled, thus reducing the amount of toxic waste, cutting disposal expenses, and conserving resources.

Future nuclear power might be safer and more affordable with innovations such as the Hyperion Power Module (HPM), a small, self-regulating, factory-sealed nuclear power plant about the size of a hot tub. HPMs would potentially provide power to an entire community or college campus for at least five years before it would need refueling. It would not contain weapons-grade materials such as enriched uranium, and, according to Hyperion, "the waste produced after five years of operation is approximately the size of a softball and is a good candidate for fuel recycling." Hyperion received the commercialization rights from the United States' Los Alamos National Laboratory, where the technology was developed. Orders for HPMs (priced at $25-$30 million) are already arriving, and they should hit the consumer marketplace within five years.

Electricity from a conventional nuclear plant is estimated at 14¢ per kilowatt hour, and Hyperion's goal is to decrease the cost even further. However, Brown reports that wind energy is currently estimated at just 7¢ per kilowatt hour, making it significantly more economically attractive. In addition to generating more (clean) energy per dollar, wind is much safer than conventional nuclear plants: You don't have to decommission a wind farm. Also, unlike the HPM, wind energy creates "green-collar jobs" that benefit local and rural economies.

- Aaron M. Cohen