Nuclear power’s insanities — taxpayer-guaranteed

The Nuclear Energy Institute — the corporate lobbyist in Washington, D.C. for the disintegrating atomic power industry — doesn’t have to worry about repercussions from the negative impacts of nuclear power. For nuclear power is a government/ taxpayer-guaranteed boondoggle whose staggering costs, incurred and deferred, are absorbed by American taxpayers via a supine government regulatory and subsidy apparatus.

So if you go to work at the NEI and you read about the absence of any permanent radioactive waste storage site, no problem, the government/taxpayers are responsible for transporting and safeguarding that lethal garbage for centuries.

If your reactors experience ever larger cost overruns and delays, as is now happening with two new reactors in South Carolina, no problem — the supine state regulatory commissions will just pass the bill on to consumers, despite the fact that consumers receive no electricity from these unfinished plants.

If these plants, and two others in Georgia under construction, experience financial squeezes fromWall Street, no problem, a supine Congress has already passed ample taxpayer loan guarantees thatmake Uncle Sam (you, the taxpayer) bear the cost of the risk.

If there were to be an accident such as the one that happened in Fukushima, Japan, no problem, under the Price-Anderson Act, the government/taxpayers bear the cost of the vast amount of damage from any nuclear power plantmeltdown. To put this cost into perspective, a report by the Atomic Energy Commission about 50 years ago estimated that a class-9 meltdown couldmake an area “the size of Pennsylvania” uninhabitable.

Why do we stand for such a doomsday technology all over America that is uneconomic, uninsurable, unsafe, unnecessary (it can’t compete with energy conservation and renewable energies), unevacuable (try evacuating the greater New York City area froma disaster at the two Indian Point plants 30miles fromManhattan) and unprotectable (either from sabotage or earthquake)?

David Freeman, the famous energy engineer and lawyer, who has run four giant utilities (the Tennessee Valley Authority, the SMUD complex — where he closed the Rancho Seco Nuclear Plant — the New York Power Authority and the Los Angeles Department ofWater and Power), sums up the history of nuclear power thisway: “Nuclear power, promoted as too cheap tometer, turned out to be too expensive to use, the road to nuclear proliferation, and the creator of radioactive trash that has no place to go.” Right-wing conservative/libertarians call it extreme “crony capitalism.”

Nuclear power plants are shutting down. In 2013, four reactors shut down: Crystal River 3, Kewaunee, San Onofre 2 and San Onofre 3. Now, Michael Peck, a senior federal nuclear expert, is urging that the last nuke plant left in California, Diablo Canyon, be shut down until the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s regulators can demonstrate that the two reactors at this site can withstand shaking fromthree nearby earthquake faults.

Meanwhile, the human, environmental and economic disasters at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi power plants keep metastasizing. Scientists are producing studies that show serious biological effects (genetic damage andmutation rates) of radiation on plant, insect and bird life in and around the large, cordoned off, uninhabitable area surrounding these closed down reactors. The giant politically-influential electric utility company underestimated the likelihood of a powerful earthquake and tsunami. In the early nineteen-seventies, the industry and its governmental patrons were expecting 1,000 nuclear plants — 100 of themalong the California coast — to be operating by the year 2000. Instead, a littlemore than a hundredwere built nationwide. In reality, as of 2014, there are only 100 operable reactors, many of which are aging.

The pitfalls are real and numerous. In addition to growing public opposition, and lower-priced natural gas attracting electric utilities, there are the ever-present, skyrocketing costs and delays of construction, repair and the question of where to store nuclear waste. These costs are what make Wall Street financiers turn their backs on nuclear power unless the industry can ram more tens of billions of dollars in government/taxpayer loan guarantees through Congress. Andwhat is all this nuclear technology, from the uranium mines to the nuclear plants to the still absentwaste storage dumps for? To boil water!

These are the tragic follieswhen the corporate masters and their political minions, who are ready and willing to guarantee taxpayer funding, have no “skin in the game.” This kind of staggering power without responsibility is indeed radioactive.

GREGORY BULL — THE ASSOCIATED PRESS This Sept. 13, 2012, file photo, shows the San Onofre nuclear power plant along the Pacific Ocean coastline near San Clemente, California. The state regulator overseeing the closure of Southern California’s San Onofre nuclear power plant says that a settlement outlining who pays for the work needs to be a better deal for consumers. Michael Florio is the California Public Utilities Commission member handling the multibillion dollar proposed settlement. He said Friday that the proposal, which the plant’s operators hammered out with consumer groups, “unfairly favors shareholders over consumers” and the commission would not consider approving it as is.