Nuclear Energy Information Service

15 hours ago

Colorado Rocky Flats ... See MoreSee Less

Nuclear Energy Information Service shared a post.

2 days ago

Solar carpark to cover shopping center’s energy needs ... See MoreSee Less

Nuclear Energy Information Service

2 days ago

ILLINOIS ENERGY TRANSFORMATION #18:
Nuclear fighting climate disruption: a case of energy “spouse abuse”
November 20, 2019

An article published in Forbes (see below) yesterday written by physicist and internationally renowned energy expert Amory Lovins of the Rocky Mountain Institute in Colorado lays out with devastating laser accuracy not only why nuclear power is an ineffective choice to combat climate disruption, but also why, “…building new reactors, or operating most existing ones, makes climate change worse compared with spending the same money on more-climate-effective ways to deliver the same energy services.”

His analysis is simple, straightforward and common-sensical: we don’t have the time, or the money to pin our hopes on nuclear effectively fighting climate disruption; and we could get more carbon out of the atmosphere if both were devoted to renewables and efficiency rather than to nuclear power, either new or existing plants.

Funny thing – NEIS has been saying this (and more) since about 2007 (and before), when we were promoting the “Carbon-Free/Nuclear Free: A Roadmap for U.S. Energy Policy,” (see below) written by Dr. Arjun Makhijani, President of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) of Takoma Park, Maryland. We condensed the concept into what we called “The 2 X 4 Rule of Fighting Climate Disruption,” (see below) because sometimes when you’re dealing with the most obtuse, intransigent idealogues, you just need a good ol’ 2 X 4 upside the head to get their attention and straighten out their thinking.

Lovins does not even come at this conclusion from well-known concerns about nuclear waste, nuclear accidents, environmental damage, nuclear proliferation or war; but solely from the simple, uncluttered, straightforward concepts of market-based economics and opportunity costs. The finite dollars you spend on uneconomic nuclear plants will be dollars not available to build out a renewable energy future.

Lovins does not confine his analysis to the mere abstract. Energy policy, good or bad, is created by active human players. And the single largest nuclear player attempting yet again to obstruct and delay the implementation of a renewable energy future is identified by Lovins as – Exelon Corporation.

No one native to Illinois would find this surprising. Exelon, and its antecedent identity as ComEd, has fought a relentless decades-old war to slow or halt energy efficiency and the growth of renewable energy, a war which continues to this day.

No progress on renewables or efficiency could be tolerated or allowed by Exelon and its legislative allies unless accompanied by a “nuclear hostage crisis,” whereby Exelon would threaten the closure of nuclear plants and the loss of all them good-paying union jobs until it received some major concession for nuclear plants – in 2016, a $2.3 billion bailout; currently, a “capacity market reform” which would guarantee the profitability of all its nuclear plants until their licenses expire. Only then could renewables be allowed a boost.

That Exelon formula for “success” has worked like a charm until – the FBI.

The past half-year of investigations, subpoenas, key top executives suddenly retiring, and potential indictments relating to Exelon and ComEd’s past lobbying practices has called a screeching halt to all energy-related legislation – at a time when swift decisive action to expand renewable energy is most needed to deal with the climate crisis.

For far too long Exelon’s hold on Illinois energy policy has closely resembled a case of spousal abuse. To not rock the boat, and keep things “happy at home,” one party constantly ignores the abuse, tolerates unacceptable behaviours, caves to unreasonable demands, even makes irrational excuses for the abuser’s actions (“But he’s really nice when he’s NOT drinking – or asking for billion dollar bailouts and eternal profitability!”). Sound familiar?

In such a situation the only reasonable and self-protective alternative is – leave, or kick the abuser out.

It’s long past time to stop tolerating Exelon’s energy abuse. It’s had decades to reform, and chose not to. Now, the climate crisis (10 years, 11 months left to radically change energy course, according to the IPCC) – as well as the FBI – dictate that a new energy path is required, ASAP. And, an abuser never leaves voluntarily.

Time to call the bluff, stop the abuse and hostage crisis game, and provide “just transitions” to the family that’s going to feel the pain of all this historic accommodation the most – the communities around the nuclear and coal plants statewide when these plants close.

Gov. Pritzker and the Legislature will be taking up comprehensive energy legislation come January, 2020, and at that time, we’ll be finding out who’s the tail, and who’s the dog in Illinois. It is critical – for both Illinois ratepayers and for the planetary climate fight – that they not just talk the talk of a 100% renewable energy future, but walk the walk and create a detailed plan with timetables of how to get there. And as Lovin’s analysis points out amply – that future has no room, time or money for unprofitable nuclear Exelon.

Carbon-Free/Nuclear Free: A Roadmap for U.S. Energy Policy written by Dr. Arjun Makhijani, President of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER)

ieer.org/projects/carbon-free-nuclear-free/

The 2 X 4 Rule of Fighting Climate Disruption

youtu.be/YIlEqkOoRzY

www.forbes.com/sites/amorylovins/2019/11/18/does-nuclear-power-slow-or-speed-climate-change/#5fb4... ... See MoreSee Less

Nuclear Energy Information Service

2 days ago

New innovations in renewable energy are happening all the time. NEIS discourages energy policies that give long term commitments to nuclear and fossil fuels. ... See MoreSee Less