The Energy Policy Act of 2005 addressed many of
the economic risks associated with the nuclear indus-
try and provided incentives that are directly relevant
to adding nuclear energy capacity. These include
loan guarantees, extension of the Price-Anderson Act
nuclear liability system, insurance against regulatory
delays, and production tax credits. An October 2010
Congressional Research Service (CRS) report, titled
Nuclear Energy Policy, states: “Together with higher
fossil fuel prices and the possibility of greenhouse gas
controls, the federal incentives for nuclear power have
helped spur renewed interest by utilities and other po-
tential reactor developers” (Holt 2010, 6). The United
States has one reactor site under construction, nine
additional reactors planned, and as many as 23 more
proposed (WNA 2011a). An $8.5 billion loan guaran-
tee was approved by the Department of Energy for
one of these projects, and others are in progress (WNA
2011a). The CRS report also advises: “Relatively low
prices for natural gas—nuclear power’s chief competi-
tor—and rising estimated nuclear plant construction
costs have decreased the likelihood that new reactors
would be built without federal support” (Holt 2010,
6).
Timelines and scale are important considerations
as well. Putting a new nuclear reactor online in the
United States has historically taken more than a de-
cade, though Asian projects have recently been com-
pleted in less than five years (WNA 2011c). The two
options discussed in the section on Climate Change
projected a need for a fleet of 340 and 135 reactors by
2035 for Option 1 and Option 2, respectively. Assum-
ing the current fleet of 104 reactors will be extended to
remain operational at that time (EIA 2010a), 236 addi-
tional reactors would be needed to meet 50 percent of
sharon
(sharon)
#1