• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • McCain Follows Energy Speech With Call for New Nuclear Plants

    Presidential hopeful Senator John McCain followed his speech on energy and climate in Houston, Texas with an emphatic call for new nuclear plants to reduce dependence on foreign energy. McCain announced,

    If I am elected president, I will set this nation on a course to building 45 new reactors by the year 2030, with the ultimate goal of 100 new plants to power the homes and factories and cities of America.”

    While this is a commendable goal, the nation will have to be careful that it is achieved by virtue of its value in the market place and not because it won the federal incentive lottery. Indeed, the dependency that such government handouts breed is what led to an industry that was unable to survive the anti-nuclear movement of the 1970’s. The role of nuclear to America’s future is too important to allow that to happen again. That is why the federal government’s role should not be to fund these reactors or set limits of 45 or 100. Its role should be to provide adequate oversight, a sound regulatory environment and fulfill its legal obligations on nuclear waste.

    Senator McCain should certainly be commended for his enthusiasm towards commercial nuclear energy. It is inevitable that nuclear energy will be needed to offset any economic impacts of cap and trade legislation, which Senator McCain also supports. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) assumes a 150% increase by 2050 (50 new reactors by 2030) in nuclear power to minimize the cost of a Lieberman-Warner type bill, and the Energy Information Agency calls for approximately 200 reactors over the next 25 years.

    Given the projected energy demand growth, about 40 to 50 reactors by 2030 will be necessary to maintain 20% of our electricity coming from nuclear power. Moreover, many people forget that an increase in nuclear can potentially reduce our strong reliance on oil. KB over at NEI asserts that plug-in electric cars would drastically reduce oil consumption while increasing electric power consumption about 17%. A broad expansion in nuclear power would meet this increase, and the best way to attain these goals and potentially exceed them will be to let the market work.

    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    One Response to McCain Follows Energy Speech With Call for New Nuclear Plants

    1. Craig Severance, Gr says:

      I agree we should let the market work but McCain is proposing hundreds of billions in Federal pork for the nuclear industry that no other energy option will get. This is not letting the different industries (who also are American businesses creating American jobs) compete with nuclear on a fair basis.

      McCain got it right proposing a "cap and trade" carbon emissions reduction plan that will allow the most cost-effective methods to be adopted using a free market approach to meet the mandates. For instance, if a limit is set on the utility industry, then the utilities will bid out proposals. Industries such as wind, solar, energy conservation, and nuclear will submit options, and if nuclear is the most cost-effective it could win some of those contracts.

      The nuclear industry, however, with its $8000+/KW costs, knows it cannot compete on a level playing field, and has now convinced McCain to throw it billions in special subsidies.

      This sounds like Energy Pork all over again. Round One was the corn ethanol lobby, now Round Two of Energy Pork is the nuclear lobby.

      Is John McCain a true conservative, against pork projects for big lobbies, or not? No taxpayer funds should be needed whatsoever with a cap and trade plan. Why is it always the taxpayer who has to pay? Anyone who proposes cap-and-trade PLUS extra subsidies is just helping out a particular lobby group.

      We should just cap-and-trade (which by definition achieves carbon reduction goals), and let the free market work out the best means to meet the goals.

      – Craig Severance, CPA, is co-author of "The Economics of Nuclear and Coal Power" (Praeger, 1976), and is a Registered Republican who served as Precinct Caucus Chair in the 2008 caucus.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.