Neighbors see value of nuke plants
Try to get an oil refinery, liquefied natural gas terminal, transmission line or even a wind farm cited and built anywhere in the United States, and good luck. The not-in-my-backyard syndrome still casts a shadow over most big energy projects. But it’s no longer much of a problem for nuclear power.
Instead of opposing nuclear power, people in communities closest to nuclear plants are among its strongest supporters. In Georgia, Maryland, Texas, South Carolina and other states where electricity companies are planning nuclear plants, there is overwhelming support for new reactors among people living close to existing nuclear plants. And that support extends to the Callaway nuclear plant in Fulton, where a new reactor might yet be built once the demand for electricity picks up.
Consider the results of a national public opinion poll of people residing within a 10-mile radius of a nuclear power plant (and, importantly, people working at the plant are excluded). Polling indicates 76 percent support for new reactor construction. What’s more, the poll — conducted by Bisconti Research Inc. — found that 90 percent of nuclear plant neighbors believe a new reactor would provide an economic stimulus for their communities. A Gallup poll shows that Americans’ support for nuclear power has climbed to 62 percent, the highest level of support since Gallup first began asking in 1994.
Nuclear plant neighbors have an understandable self-interest in reactor construction. A new reactor will bring $430 million in sales of goods and services to the local community, and $20 million in state and local taxes, a Nuclear Energy Institute study shows.
Another reason for nuclear power’s support is new plant construction creates well-paying, high-technology jobs. Construction of an additional reactor at the Calvert Cliffs nuclear plant in Maryland is expected to provide as many as 4,000 construction jobs and 400 permanent jobs once the new unit begins operating.
Electricity utilities have applied for licenses to construct and operate nearly 30 new nuclear plants around the country. If all or even most of the plants are built, they will create hundreds of thousands of jobs — not only at the plants but also at manufacturing facilities where equipment and components for new reactors are made. And nuclear plant construction will provide thousands of additional service jobs in the local communities themselves.
Credit for this support in nearby communities also goes to the industry’s excellent safety record. The Institute of Nuclear Power Operations, an Atlanta-based industry organization that tracks nuclear safety and establishes industrywide goals for nuclear plants, says that all the safety indices it follows — from the number of unplanned reactor shutdowns to worker radiation exposure — has shown significant improvement over the past two decades.
That good record includes radioactive waste. A lot of used fuel is being stored at plants, but it’s being handled safely and securely. Although the decision to cancel the Yucca Mountain repository project is regrettable and obviously political, experts say the used fuel at nuclear plants could remain safely in water pools and concrete-and-steel dry casks for 300 years. Or, if reprocessing is revived here, used fuel could be recycled to produce new fuel for electricity production, much as the French and British now do. Reprocessing would greatly reduce the amount of waste that would need to be disposed of in a repository.
Many scientists see emission-free nuclear power as one of the few ways to provide large-scale production of clean energy, reducing the need for fossil fuels. Nuclear reactors produce none of the smokestack gases from coal burning that cause an estimated 20,000 premature deaths per year from lung and cardiovascular disease in the United States. Hence, any sensible program to achieve better air quality and curb carbon emissions should encourage expanded use of nuclear power as part of the energy portfolio.
By any measure — electricity production, reliable and safe performance, environmental well-being — U.S. nuclear plants are operating very well, and that is a good foundation on which to build. No one knows that better than the people who live near the plants.
