

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Opponents of nuclear power have long argued that in addition to the inherent safety threat of nuclear power, the idea that the nuclear energy is "cheap" has been a bogus claim made by the industry -- a fact they say is proved by the private sector's unwillingness to invest in plant construction without enormous taxpayer-backed loan guarantees and subsidies by state and federal government.
Now, analysis by the Associated Press suggests that the combined overruns from projects in Georgia, Tennessee, and South Carolina could top $2 billion. Much of that cost would fall to rate-payers and taxpayers.
In the case of the new Vogtle reactor being built in Georgia -- where overruns are in the hundreds of millions -- a representative of a nuclear watchdog group told the Atlanta Journal Constitution that the utility companies were misleading about their declarations to be on time and on budget.
"They promised us this time it would be different. They were going to streamline it; they were going to get it organized in advance so that it would go smoothly," said Mark Cooper, a senior research fellow for economic analysis at the Vermont Law School's energy and environment institute.
The AP's review of pending projects found:
Earlier this year, US Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), along with Taxpayers for Common Sense president Ryan Alexander, wrote: "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," they said.
# # #
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |

Opponents of nuclear power have long argued that in addition to the inherent safety threat of nuclear power, the idea that the nuclear energy is "cheap" has been a bogus claim made by the industry -- a fact they say is proved by the private sector's unwillingness to invest in plant construction without enormous taxpayer-backed loan guarantees and subsidies by state and federal government.
Now, analysis by the Associated Press suggests that the combined overruns from projects in Georgia, Tennessee, and South Carolina could top $2 billion. Much of that cost would fall to rate-payers and taxpayers.
In the case of the new Vogtle reactor being built in Georgia -- where overruns are in the hundreds of millions -- a representative of a nuclear watchdog group told the Atlanta Journal Constitution that the utility companies were misleading about their declarations to be on time and on budget.
"They promised us this time it would be different. They were going to streamline it; they were going to get it organized in advance so that it would go smoothly," said Mark Cooper, a senior research fellow for economic analysis at the Vermont Law School's energy and environment institute.
The AP's review of pending projects found:
Earlier this year, US Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), along with Taxpayers for Common Sense president Ryan Alexander, wrote: "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," they said.
# # #

Opponents of nuclear power have long argued that in addition to the inherent safety threat of nuclear power, the idea that the nuclear energy is "cheap" has been a bogus claim made by the industry -- a fact they say is proved by the private sector's unwillingness to invest in plant construction without enormous taxpayer-backed loan guarantees and subsidies by state and federal government.
Now, analysis by the Associated Press suggests that the combined overruns from projects in Georgia, Tennessee, and South Carolina could top $2 billion. Much of that cost would fall to rate-payers and taxpayers.
In the case of the new Vogtle reactor being built in Georgia -- where overruns are in the hundreds of millions -- a representative of a nuclear watchdog group told the Atlanta Journal Constitution that the utility companies were misleading about their declarations to be on time and on budget.
"They promised us this time it would be different. They were going to streamline it; they were going to get it organized in advance so that it would go smoothly," said Mark Cooper, a senior research fellow for economic analysis at the Vermont Law School's energy and environment institute.
The AP's review of pending projects found:
Earlier this year, US Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), along with Taxpayers for Common Sense president Ryan Alexander, wrote: "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," they said.
# # #