 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
National Energy Policy: Nuclear Energy
Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality
The Honorable Pete V. Domenici
STATEMENT Mr. Chairman, thank you for the invitation to testify before your Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality. I compliment you on the choice of subject for this hearing, the role of nuclear energy in national energy policy -- this issue is of critical importance to our nation's energy and economic security. Nuclear energy now provides about 22 percent of our electricity from 103 nuclear reactors. The operating costs of nuclear energy are among the lowest of any source. The Utility Data Institute recently reported production costs for nuclear at 1.83 cents per kilowatt-hour, with coal at 2.08 cents per kilowatt-hour. Through careful optimization of operating efficiencies, the output of nuclear plants has risen dramatically since the 1980's; nuclear plants operated with an amazing 87 percent capacity factor in 2000. Since 1990, with no new nuclear plants, the output of our plants has still increased by over 20 percent. That's equivalent to gaining the output of about 20 new nuclear plants without building any. Safety has been a vital focus, as evidenced by a constant decrease in the number of emergency shutdowns, or "scrams," in our domestic plants. In 1985, there were 2.4 scrams per reactor, last year there were just 0.03. While some use the Three Mile Island accident to highlight their concerns with nuclear energy, the fact remains that our safety systems worked at Three Mile Island and no members of the public were endangered. Another example of the exemplary safety of nuclear reactors, when properly designed and managed, lies with our nuclear navy. They now operate about 90 nuclear powered ships, and over the years, they've operated about 250 reactors in all. In that time, they've accumulated 5,400 reactor-years of operation, over twice the number of reactor-years in our civilian sector. In all that time, they have never had a significant incident with their reactors. They are welcomed into over 150 major foreign ports in over 50 countries. Nuclear energy and coal are our major producers of our electricity -- those two sources provide over 70 percent. In both cases, their use presents significant risks. Together, they illustrate a fundamental point, that absolutely every source of energy presents both benefits and risks. It's our responsibility to ensure that citizens are presented with accurate information on benefits and risks, information that is free from any political biases. And where risk areas are noted, it's our responsibility to devise programs that mitigate or avoid the risks. Solutions, through careful research, for clean coal and for nuclear waste storage address key risk areas for these two electricity sources. Interest in our nuclear plants is increasing along with dramatically increased confidence in their ability to contribute to our energy needs. Interest in re-licensing plants, to extend their lifetime beyond the originally planned 40 years, has greatly expanded. The NRC has now approved re-licensing for 5 reactors, and over 30 other reactors have begun the renewal process. Industry experts now expect virtually all operating plants to apply for license extension. Nuclear energy is essentially emission free. We avoided the emission of 167 million tons of carbon last year or more than 2 billion tons since the 1970's. In 1999, nuclear power plants provided about half of the total carbon reductions achieved by U.S. industry under the federal voluntary reporting program. The inescapable fact is that nuclear energy is making an immense contribution to the environmental health of our nation. But unfortunately, when it comes to nuclear energy, we're living on our past global leadership. Most of the technologies that drive the world's nuclear energy systems originated here. Much of our early leadership derived from our requirements for a nuclear navy; that work enabled many of the civilian aspects of nuclear power. Our reactor designs are found around the world. The reprocessing technology used in some countries originated here. The fuel designs in use around the world largely were developed here. This nation provided the global leadership to start the age of nuclear energy. Now, our leadership is seriously at risk. No nuclear plant has been ordered in the United States in over 20 years. To some extent, this was driven by decreases in energy demand following the early oil price shocks and from public fears about Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. But we also have allowed complex environmental reviews and regulatory stalemates to extend approval and construction times and to seriously undercut prospects for any additional plants. As a nation, we cannot afford to lose the nuclear energy option until we are ready to specify with confidence how we are going to replace 22 percent of our electricity with some other source offering comparable safety, reliability, low cost, and environmental attributes. We risk our nation's future prosperity if we lose the nuclear option through inaction. Instead, we need concrete action to secure the nuclear option for future generations. We must not subject the nation to the risk of inadequate energy supplies. In closing, Mr. Chairman, There is no single "silver bullet" that will address our nation's thirst for clean, reliable, reasonably priced, energy sources. Energy is far too important to our economic and military strength to rely on any small subset of the available options. In my view, it is critically important to our nation that nuclear energy be treated as a strong, viable option for our nation's electricity needs now and into the distant future. This would ensure that future generations continue to enjoy clean, safe, reliable electricity and the many benefits that this energy source provides.
|
|||||||||||
|
