The President recently offered $8.33 B in loan guarantees to help finance the construction of two new reactors in Georgia (see the Washington Post article: Obama Offers Fund loan to help Fund Two Nuclear Reactors).
While there are critics on all sides of the issue, here is at least one reason why the loan guarantees are actually good for renewable energy sources like solar, wind, and energy storage: they help disprove the myth that nuclear power is the cheapest alternative. If it was proven and cheap, there would be no need for the federal government to provide billions of dollars in guarantees.
The reality is that nuclear energy, like other alternative energies, has some positive and some negative aspects to its cost, but the regulated way that electric rates are provided to consumers makes them difficult for traditional market forces to influence. In this respect, nuclear is not substantially different from other alternative energy sources, many of which have a role to play in meeting our environmental and resource challenges.
Federal and State government support is helpful (and required) for “leveling the playing field” and allowing alternative technologies to compete in a market where they otherwise would not fit, but the best way for these technologies to find their proper place is for the general public to continue to get better educated.
The need for billions in government support will force people to rethink the notion that nuclear energy is inexpensive and does not require subsidies, and will allow the debate to continue based on the facts.
