James Hansen denounces political efforts to shutter nuclear
Inbox
| x | |||||
| ||||||
On Monday, a coalition of scientists and conservationists including James Hansen; Michael Shellenberger, an anti-nuclear activist turned high-profile nuclear proponent; and Whole Earth catalogue founder Stewart Brand sent an open letter to
Illinois legislators asking them to “do everything in your power to
keep all of Illinois’s nuclear power plants running for their full
lifetimes.”
That night, Shellenberger, Hansen and philanthropist Rachel Pritzker spoke at Northwestern University’s journalism school, and on Tuesday
they paid a visit to workers at Exelon’s Clinton nuclear plant, one of
up to three the company has threatened to close if the state does not
pass a law ensuring Exelon up to $300 million more per year in revenue.
The
letter says that 18,640 lives were saved by Exelon’s Clinton and Quad
Cities nuclear plants, compared to the theoretical impacts of air
pollution that would be caused by fossil fuel plants generating the same
amount of energy. If those two plants close, the letter says, “much of
the nuclear energy would have to be made up for with coal or natural
gas.”
“One
solution might be to expand Illinois’ Renewable Portfolio Standard to
include nuclear energy,” says the letter. “Such a change would allow
Illinois to be more ambitious, achieving 70 percent or more of its
electricity from clean energy. The standard should be set so that
renewable energy has plenty of room to grow while ensuring that Illinois
does not go backwards.”
The
energy bill previously proposed by Exelon would create a low-carbon
portfolio standard to replace the renewable portfolio standard. Critics
have argued that the bill would diminish the case for new renewable energy in the state.
Support for nuclear or for Exelon?
Elisabeth Moyer, a
climate scientist who declined to sign the letter, was in the audience
at Northwestern and criticized the speakers for using a general bid for
support of nuclear energy to mask a push for legislation mired in the
“swamp of Illinois politics.”
Opponents of Exelon’s bill say the company does not need more funds to keep the plants open, especially after capacity auctions last year that were very favorable for the plants.
Shellenberger
stressed that he and Environmental Progress Illinois have not taken a
formal position on Exelon’s proposed legislation. Speaking with Midwest Energy News, he expressed support for the concepts in the bill.
“Nuclear
is not treated fairly as a clean energy source – it does not get the
same subsidies as solar and wind gets, and everyone agrees if it were
its plants would not be in trouble,” he said. “Everyone agrees if you
had it included in the RPS, it would not be in trouble.
“You
have complicated questions about how much Exelon is losing – are they
demanding too much?” But the bottom line, he said, is that the Clinton
plant and the others in Exelon’s fleet should stay open.
Shellenberger recently founded the group Environmental Progress Illinois (EPI), described
as an independent organization that takes no donations from the energy
industry. The slogan on its website is “protect and grow solar, wind and
nuclear energy.”
“It’s
too bad we have to have these corporations that own these plants,”
Shellenberger said. “We have these magic machines – these are public
assets – these are really important plants for all of us.”
Pritzker,
a board member and major funder of Environmental Progress Illinois,
said, “I realize it’s become a partisan issue but I have hope that by
having more conversations like this, by talking to people on both sides
of the aisle, we can find some compromises...providing a new model of
how to properly value and price energy could have ramifications well
beyond Illinois for the rest of the country and even the world.”
Hansen
called for making nuclear more competitive by putting a price on the
cost of carbon emissions and on the health impacts of fossil fuels. He
cited statistics showing that pollution from fossil fuels is estimated
to kill more people per day than have ever died in nuclear plant
accidents.
“The
way to do this is stop subsidizing solar, wind or any energy source but
have a rising carbon fee,” Hansen said. “That way we can stop arguing
about which one has the worst pollution. Just let the market make the
decisions.”
Hansen
touted the promise of next-generation nuclear technology, which would
make it possible to build nuclear plants more quickly and cheaply.
Talking with Midwest Energy News, Shellenberger described
next-generation technology as farther away from viability than he had
previously hoped, and urged more focus on the nation’s existing
reactors.
“How much safer could they be?” he said. “If you have nuclear plants that don’t hurt anyone, keep running them.”
A matter of emotion?
Shellenberger told Midwest Energy News that
support for nuclear energy has grown recently among environmental
leaders and “elites,” even while opposition to nuclear power among the
general public has risen in the wake of the Fukushima disaster.
A Gallup poll last month found that for the first time, a majority of Americans – 54 percent – oppose nuclear energy.
In 2003 Shellenberger co-founded the Breakthrough Institute,
aimed at “changing the way people think about energy and the
environment.” The Breakthrough Institute was involved in the production
of “Pandora’s Promise,” a 2013 film touting the benefits of nuclear
energy. Some predicted the film would change the dialogue on nuclear energy; critics saw it as biased propaganda for the industry.
Shellenberger compared the shift in environmentalists’ attitudes toward nuclear as akin to changing views on rural versus urban living.
“Today environmentalists love cities,” he said. And he compared fears
about the safety of nuclear energy to fears about the safety of
vaccines.
“Our
fears of these technologies are completely out of whack with what all
the objective science says,” Shellenberger told the crowd at
Northwestern.
He told Midwest Energy News that
while concerns about the safety and environmental impacts of nuclear
energy are especially high in the West and the Northeast, where the
future of California’s Diablo Canyon and New York’s Indian Point nuclear plant are in doubt, Midwesterners are more concerned about the financial aspects of energy.
“Support for nuclear energy rises when energy prices are high,” he told Midwest Energy News.
Some
critics in the audience at Northwestern said they have valid concerns
about waste and safety. “My concerns are not unfounded and my concerns
are not silly, which is what you are saying,” said attendee Margaret
Aguilar.
Shellenberger
countered that evidence shows no significant safety risks from stored
nuclear waste or nuclear reactors, and he said people who don’t have
science to back up their positions on nuclear could be seen as in the
same category as climate change deniers.
Such
calculations were among the reasons he shifted from his early days of
anti-nuclear activism to become an ardent nuclear advocate. Despite
public opposition and funding challenges like that facing the Clinton
plant, Shellenberger said he is confident that nuclear energy will
prevail.
“The
Rosie the Riveter meme has spread in the nuclear community,”
Shellenberger said at Northwestern, showing slides of a woman with an
image of an atom inked on her bicep, and the slogan “We Can Do It.”
————
Michael Shellenberger :: Founder and President, Environmental Progress :: landline: 510-984-0076 cell: 415-309-4200 :: EnvironmentalP
| ||||||
No comments:
Post a Comment