Race to cut carbon emissions splits US states on nuclear
3 Min Read
Many US states are realizing that solar, wind, and other renewable energy sources may not be enough to keep the lights on as they try to reduce their reliance on fossil fuels.
-
The race to cut carbon emissions splits US states on nuclear power.
As US states are pushed to reduce their usage of fossil fuels due to climate change, many are realizing that solar, wind, and other renewable energy sources may not be enough to keep the lights on.
Nuclear power is gaining traction as a solution to bridge the gap with states moving away from coal, oil, and natural gas to cut greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate the worst effects of global warming.
The increasing interest in nuclear power comes as companies, including one founded by Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, work on smaller, less expensive reactors that may help cities around the United States supplement their electricity grids.
Nuclear power has its own set of issues, including radioactive waste, which can be deadly for thousands of years. However, proponents argue that the hazards can be mitigated and the energy source will be critical in ensuring power supply stability as the world attempts to transition away from carbon-emitting fossil fuels.
Can we reduce CO2 without nuclear power?
Tennessee Valley Authority President and CEO Jeff Lyash put it simply: You can’t significantly reduce carbon emissions without nuclear power.
“At this point, I don’t see a path that gets us there without preserving the existing fleet and building new nuclear,” Lyash said. “And that’s after having maximized the amount of solar we can build in the system.”
As the nation's third-largest electrical provider, the TVA is a federally controlled utility that distributes electricity to seven states. It wants to build roughly 10,000 megawatts of solar capacity by 2035, enough to power about 1 million households, but it also operates three nuclear facilities and is testing a tiny reactor in Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
It wants to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, which means that the amount of greenhouse gases produced is equal to the amount eliminated from the atmosphere.
Could nuclear power replace fossil fuels?
According to an Associated Press poll of energy policies in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, a substantial majority—roughly two-thirds—believes nuclear power will assist to replace fossil fuels in some way.
The growing support for nuclear power could result in the first nuclear reactor construction boom in the United States in more than three decades.
In response to the AP's survey, over one-third of the states and the District of Columbia said they have no plans to include nuclear power in their green energy targets, instead of relying largely on renewables.
Energy officials in those states claim that their goals can be met because of developments in energy storage employing batteries, infrastructure investments for high-voltage interstate transmission, energy efficiency efforts to cut demand, and hydroelectric dam power.
Nuclear power is dividing the US states, mirroring a similar discussion in Europe, where some countries, such as Germany, are phasing down reactors while others, and others, such as France, are sticking with the technology or planning to build more.
Nuclear power is seen as important by the Biden administration, which has attempted to take dramatic efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions to help compensate for the decline of carbon-based fuels in the nation's energy infrastructure.
