EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Stop the Nuclear Industry Welfare Program
After 60 years, the taxpayer should not continue to subsidize multibillion-dollar corporations in the nuclear energy sector
The US is facing a $15 trillion national debt, and there is no shortage of opinions about how to move toward deficit reduction in the federal budget. One topic you will not hear discussed very often on Capitol Hill is the idea of ending one of the oldest American welfare programmes – the extraordinary amount of corporate welfare going to the nuclear energy industry.
'It is shocking that the nuclear industry continues to receive so much federal support at a time of record debt.' (Photograph: Sean Dempsey/PA)
Many in Congress talk of getting "big government off the back of private industry". Here's an industry we'd like to get off the backs of the taxpayers.
As, respectively, a senator who is the longest-serving independent in Congress and the president of an independent and non-partisan budget watchdog organisation, we do not necessarily agree on everything when it comes to energy and budget policy in the US. But one thing we strongly agree on is the need to end wasteful subsidies that prop up the nuclear industry. After 60 years, this industry should not require continued and massive corporate welfare. It is time for the nuclear power industry to stand on its own two feet.
Nuclear welfare started with research and development. According to the non-partisan Congressional Research Service, since 1948 the federal government has spent more than $95bn (in 2011 dollars) on nuclear energy research and development (R&D). That is more than four times the amount spent on solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, biofuels, and hydropower combined. But federal R&D was not enough; the industry also wanted federal liability insurance too, which it got back in 1957 with the Price-Anderson Act. This federal liability insurance programme for nuclear plants was meant to be temporary, but Congress repeatedly extended it, most recently through 2025. Price-Anderson puts taxpayers on the hook for losses that exceed $12. 6bn if there is a nuclear plant disaster. When government estimates show the cost for such a disaster could reach $720bn in property damage alone, that's one sweetheart deal for the nuclear industry!
It is shocking that the nuclear industry continues to receive so much federal support at a time of record debt. Of course nuclear subsidies benefit some of the wealthiest and most powerful energy corporations in America, which may explain the persistence of nuclear welfare.
R&D and Price-Anderson insurance are still just the tip of the iceberg. From tax breaks for uranium mining and loan guarantees for uranium enrichment to special depreciation benefits and lucrative federal tax breaks for every kilowatt hour from new plants, nuclear is heavily subsidised at every phase. The industry also bilks taxpayers when plants close down with tax breaks for decommissioning plants. Further, it is estimated that the cost to taxpayers for the disposal of radioactive nuclear waste could be as much as $100bn.
Even with all of those subsidies, the private sector still will not agree to finance a new nuclear plant, so wealthy nuclear corporations recently secured access to $18.5bn in taxpayer-backed loan guarantees. Maybe the Wall Street banks agree with the Congressional Budget Office, which estimated the risk of default on nuclear loans at above 50%. The nuclear industry's financial troubles are not new. In the 1960s and 1970s, 100 reactors were cancelled because of cost overruns. Things were so bad Forbes called it "the largest managerial disaster in business history". Despite this history, some want to dramatically increase federal loan guarantees for nuclear plants.
It is shocking that the nuclear industry continues to receive so much federal support at a time of record debt. Of course nuclear subsidies benefit some of the wealthiest and most powerful energy corporations in America, which may explain the persistence of nuclear welfare. For example, Exelon, which takes in $33bn in revenue annually, is the leading operator/owner of nuclear reactors in the US. Entergy, with revenues of more than $11bn annually, is the second largest. Together, these two companies own or operate almost one-third of US reactors, and based on their revenue they are doing pretty well. Why do they need endless federal welfare for their industry year after year? Will it ever end?
Well, as secretary of energy Steven Chu confirmed at a recent Senate hearing, without federal liability insurance and loan guarantees, no one would ever build a new nuclear plant. Whether you support nuclear energy or not, we should all be able to agree that with record debt, we cannot afford to continue to subsidise this mature industry and its multibillion-dollar corporations. If the nuclear industry believes so fervently in its technology, then it and Wall Street investors can put their money where their mouth is. Let's let them finance it, insure it, and pay for it themselves.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



28 Comments so far
Show AllObama never met a corporate welfare program he didn't like. The nuke industry will continue to be showered with corporate welfare at least until Obama moves out of the White House in 2017.
GE, one of the biggest players in the nuke industry, also owns lots of US media, thereby enabling them to keep the pro-nuke propaganda flowing.
Don't vote for Obama. Vote 3rd party.
I don't think that will change if Romney gets in either. Both major parties work for the same boss. A third party vote is our only recourse.
bernie has spent his life demonstrating how many things he is against of - he should ask people victimized by the system how to start things, like national currency and government not living on handouts anymore
What "government" are you talking about?
OK, I'm convinced. I order by the power of U.S. citizenship invested in me, that the nuclear industry welfare program be halted immediately!
Why is Bernie the only representative who's head is where it belongs? Looking out for the people who elected him. For the rest, maybe a national " head out" day. So reps can see the people who put them in office.
It would save us a lot of time and energy if someone could simply post the very short list of the non-corrupt dealings between the congress and the industries they pretend to regulate.
Here is a list of non-corrupt dealing between congress and the industries they pretend to regulate:
1)
if one people can stop even more other people and vice verse, we move from america to super america
What is your point?
...and then there's this:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/09/30/the-myth-of-bernie-sanders/
Peace
Pet
Your tax dollars at work.
You are so right on, Bernie. It is mind-blowing that the nuclear industry continues to receive so much "federal" as well as other support at a time when the repukes are whining about debt.
It's just plain "Corporate Welfare", with the Nuclear power industry being one of the hogsters. Why do we continue to subsidize the Wall Street Midases? Bail them out? Lower their taxes. Make them stop whining. Pet them some more. After all, they are the "job creators", right?
It seems certain that nuclear subsidies benefit some of the wealthiest and most powerful energy corporations in America, and they are all in bed with the devil. They don't care about us, the people, they don't care about our Mother Earth, and there seems to be no limit to their appetites.
Can we not exile them to Mercury, or perhaps another planet with noxious gases and Venusian heat, where they can dig for more, plunder more, and at the same time, maybe exhaust their inexhaustible hunger and thirst. This planet is already drained. Blast those greedy reptiles to another galaxy far away.
This article is a reminder for all those pro-nuke power folks who claim that solar, wind, tidal, geo-thermal, etc is too expensive. With out such massive bail-outs & the Price-Anderson Act [plus nuke weapons development] there would be no nuke power industry- because its cost would be prohibitive. Yet w all of this Gov't welfare the cost of building nuke power is still too damn expensive & cost over-runs of 2Xs -3Xs the original estimate are common-place.
Take a look at this website from New Mexico on what's going on there:
www.radfreenm.org
Scary to realize how little the government cares about protecting the public.
Yes it is. From this site :
What does the National Academy of Sciences have to say about DOE's 'Long-term Environmental Stewardship' program for its legacy waste sites?
Contamination has already migrated off some sites and there is a potential for this happening at more contaminated sites.
It is not known what the long-term behavior of contaminants in the environment will be if the systems devised to contain it disappear or fail.
Complete elimination of unacceptable risks to people and the environment will not be achieved now or in the foreseeable future.
The government can try to keep certain areas off limits, but it does not have the technology, money or management techniques to prevent contamination from spreading.
Without constant attention stewardship measures imposed today are not likely to remain effective for as long as residual contamination presents risks.
"Stewardship" (covering waste with dirt and instituting institutional controls) of waste sites will be difficult if not impossible to achieve.
At many sites hazardous wastes will remain posing risks to people and the environment for tens or even thousands of years.
No plan developed today is likely to remain protective for the duration of the hazards.
Or we could put gobs of money in cars no one wants or solindra type companies that waste my tax dollars, at least the nuclear industry is producing power for those coal powered cars hussein so likes.
It is our money and we can spend it the WAY we choose. And, we don't WANT UNSAFE, dare I say dangerous, disease producing, exorbitantly expensive energy that exceeds our capacity to manage for the next billion years.
You only think it is your money hussein will decide what is best dor you.
Well, if he doesn't support our ideas, and we make it clear that we will no longer fund his ideas but become responsible for our own behavior then he too might reconsider.
Besides just the taxpayer rip-off, Nuke Power Plants are slowly killing us. They all leak, which is why they are all modified with blowstacks hundreds of feet tall to send the radioactive isotopes away from the workers. Cancer is now projected to overtake heart disease as the number one killer in the U.S. GE Mark I containment plants don't work: They are ticking time-bombs all over the world. While the world continues to be lied to by the GE owned media, Fukushima has a major crisis every few weeks:
Earthquakes, Cooling Leaks, Meltdowns, Melt-throughs, explosions, Typhoons, and worse: Management skulldugery burning dangerous Pu-239 MOX fuel (putonium oxide) which created a fireball and mushroom cloud over Unit Three on March 14th, 2011. Just Listen to this Radio EcoShock interview with Arnold Gundersen former VP tuned whistleblower and Nuke Engineer, of Fairewinds Associates:
http://www.fairewinds.com/content/radio-ecoshock-worst-problems-world
Fukushima is not over. It may still get us all. Jmho's.
TJ
Sanders' comments would have more strength if he didn't support dumping Vermont's nuclear waste on Indian lands in the Southwest.
Storimg waste in geologically stable areas like Yucca mountain is the best solution.
No,
Shutting down all nuclear power is the best solution. Yucca Mountain is situated over unstable Earthquake faults which is why storage there was halted. With increased seismic activity all over the world, no place is safe, which is why the mob of each country is always involved in the "clean ups" or in dumping it in the ocean as the UN discovered. All JMHO'S.
It was politics.
"The US is facing a $15 trillion national debt, and there is no shortage of opinions about how to move toward deficit reduction in the federal budget."
Why is everything phrased this way today? War isn't. If nuclear power and it's generation causes hazards to mankind shouldn't that outweigh any debt owed to simply a financial creditor?
If not why is abortion seen as a crime. It's simply a a means of reducing a liability. Why the double standard? If we're all going to be exposed to more nuclear corruption is it not better to end lives contaminated and made less viable by it? Is the nuclear industry willing to support the mutants born because of it's pollution and corruption?
Ralph Nader was saying this back in the 1970s if not earlier. I remember helping to run a campaign against commerciall nuclear power in Oregon. Those were glory days in some ways. But some folks think we just sat around smoking pot, doing the "bad thing," and all like that.
The Price Anderson flim flam Act was quite a dog with the gravy train it put the nuclear power gang on.