Energy Efficiency News

New WISPIRG report shows that dollar for dollar, a clean energy portfolio can produce more energy than nuclear power

(Madison, WI) – With the state considering solutions to reduce our global warming pollution, a new WISPIRG report finds that renewable energy sources can produce far more electricity than nuclear plants for less money.

Unfortunately, the nuclear industry has proposed thirty new reactors across the country at an estimated cost of $300 billion.

“Taxpayers should not be subsidizing nuclear power when there are faster, cleaner, cheaper alternatives to meet our energy needs,” said WISPIRG Advocate Kara Rumsey.

Here in Wisconsin the nuclear industry is pushing to overturn a long-standing law that prevents new nuclear plants from being built unless the proposed plant is economically advantageous to ratepayers and there is safe and adequate disposal for radioactive waste.

Nuclear power is among the most costly approaches to solving America’s energy problems. 

“Per dollar of investment, clean energy solutions – such as energy efficiency and renewable resources – deliver far more energy than nuclear power,” Rumsey stated.

Per Dollar of Investment:

·        Energy efficiency measures can deliver greater than five times more electricity than nuclear power.

·        Combined heat and power (which generates both useful heat and electricity for a factory, a school campus, or an office building) can generate nearly four times more energy than nuclear power.

·        Wind farms can produce as much as 100 percent more electricity than nuclear power.

·        A solar thermal power plant in the southwestern U.S. – capable of storing heat to generate electricity even when the sun isn’t shining – can deliver as much as one-third more energy than a nuclear reactor.

The report recommended the following policies to ensure that taxpayers get the best return for their investment:

·        State leaders should continue to require that any company proposing a new nuclear reactor must demonstrate that nuclear would be more cost-effective than other ways to meet electricity demand, including energy efficiency, before allowing construction to proceed.

·        Federal and state leaders should ensure that energy companies and their shareholders shoulder all of the financial risk of any new nuclear reactor project, not ratepayers or taxpayers. In particular, regulators should not allow utilities to levy advance charges on consumers in order to finance the construction of a new reactor.

·        Congress should repeal the Price Anderson act, under which taxpayers shoulder the lion’s share of responsibility for any major nuclear accident.

·        America should shift current federal subsidies away from nuclear and fossil fuel energy, creating billions of dollars annually for research, development, and deployment of more effective energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies.