(January 19, 1990) The 1980's marked a decade of decline for the US nuclear industry as radioactive waste doubled, costs quadrupled and mishaps exceeded 34,000 in number.
(325.3249) WISE Amsterdam - These are among the findings of "A Decade of Decline: The Degeneration of Nuclear Power in the 1980's and the Emergence of Safer Energy Alternatives", a study released in December by Public Citizen and more than two dozen other citizen groups in the US. The 38-page study is based on records obtained from the US Department of Energy (DOE), the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and other federal and state government agencies as well as industry, academic and private sources. Public Citizen used these records to compare the status of nuclear power in the US at the end of the decade to its status in 1980.
With the end of the 1980's, the US faces a new energy crisis. As energy-related environmental problems such as global warming, acid rain, urban smog and radioactive waste continue to worsen, the nuclear industry argues that it is now time to begin building a "new generation" of nuclear plants. Despite its aggressive self-promotion, the nuclear industry is in decline. The study points out there has not been an order for a new reactor within the US since 1978. More plants were cancelled or permanently retired during the past decade than were completed. Although the number of licensed-to-operate nuclear reactors increased from 69 in 1980 to 112 in 1989, not a single order was placed for a new nuclear reactor at any time during the past ten years. And while only nine reactors are still officially "under construction", only three are actually expected to be completed.
Economically, the average construction costs for new reactors coming on line increased four-fold, from US $1,135 per kilowatt (kW) of capacity in 1980 to $4,590 per kW for reactors completed in 1989. Operating and maintenance costs have risen a total of 69% since 1980, from $44.50 per kW of plant capacity to $75.00 per kW in 1988 (the last year for which there is complete data) - an average annual increase of 6.5% above inflation. Similarly, the cost for major repairs has increased by 30% since 1980 from $959 per kW of capacity to $1,243 per kW in 1987 (the last year for which there is complete data) - an average annual increase of 4% above inflation.
Among other findings are that while there has been a noticeable decline in the average per-worker dose, the NRC has allowed the number of workers exposed to measurable amounts of radiation at US reactors to increase by almost 30% from 80,331 in 1980 to 103,227 in 1988 (the most recent year for which there is complete data). In fact, between 1980 and 1988, there were over 832,000 instances of nuclear power plant workers being exposed to measurable amounts of radiation.
In addition, the study finds that the total accumulation of highlevel waste (i.e. used fuel rods) from commercial nuclear reactors in terms of radioactivity has almost doubled since 1980 and now stands at 18.7 billion curies while the mass of this waste has grown by 170%, from 6,534 metric tons in 1980 to 17,607 metric tons in 1988. Similarly, during the 1980's, the total accumulated volume of disposed "low-level" (but still dangerously radioactive) waste from commercial nuclear power plants has grown by 117%, from 291,300 cubic meters to 631,300 cubic meters in 1988. The accumulated "low-level" waste in terms of radioactivity has increased by more than 140%, from 778,000 curies in 1980 to 1,843,000 curies today. Moreover, nuclear power's share (in terms of radioactivity) of the "low-level" waste generated from all commercial sources has increased from 30% in 1980 to 82% today. Uranium mill tailings have grown by 23.8%, from 94.4 million cubic meters in 1980 to almost 117 million cubic meters by the end of 1988. Yet, over a decade after enactment of comprehensive legislation requiring the clean-up of mill tailings sites, at least 13 of the 25 sites have failed to comply with environmental standards. This is due, in a large part, to industry resistance.
All the while, energy efficiency and renewables have emerged as cleaner, cheaper, safer, and more socially acceptable alternatives to nuclear power. For example, the energy consumed per unit of Gross National Product (GNP) improved by 17.6% between 1980 and 1989, from 23,800 Btu's per dollar of GNP to 19,600 Btu's per dollar of GNP. Moreover, between 1980 and 1989, energy efficiency improvements reduced total US energy use by over 23 quadrillion Btu's (equal to more than 25% of US total current energy use) from the amount that would have been used if energy use had continued to pattern the growth in the GNP as it had prior to the 1973 Arab oil embargo. Energy use in 1989 alone was 36.5 quadrillion Btu's less than it would have been had pre-1972 trends continued - an amount six times greater than the energy produced by nuclear power during the same year. Electrical demand was reduced by 82% between 1980 and 1989 from the levels once projected on the basis of pre-1972 trends. Moreover, the cost of these savings were 0 to 4 cents per kilowatt-hour (kwh) compared to the 6 to 12 cents per kwh cost for nuclear generated electricity.
Between 1980 and 1989, more than 21,000 megawatts (MW) of renewable energy-based electric capacity was brought on line, almost half of which is supplied by non-hydroelectric sources including wind, biomass, direct solar, and geothermal. These latter technologies experienced a nine-fold increase during the 1980's, from 1,100 MW in 1980 to nearly 10,000 MW today. And while nuclear power costs have continued to rise, the costs for many renewable energy technologies have dropped dramatically during the past decade. For example, costs for photovoltaic solar cells have been reduced by 75% and the costs for wind and solar thermal electric systems have declined by more than 60%. Also, renewable energy technologies now account for 8.8% of the nation's domestic energy supply compared to nuclear power's contribution of 8.2%. Further, they account for more electrical capacity than nuclear power (98,536 MW compared to 97,526 MW) although not yet quite as much electrical output.
However, federal funding for further research and development of these technologies was slashed during the 1980's. Between 1980 and 1989, federal funding for energy conservation was cut 68%, from $406 million in 1980 to $129 million in 1989. Similarly, funding for renewables was reduced 89%, from $848 million in 1980 to $91 million in 1989 (constant 1982 dollars).
The study recommends that nuclear plants still being built, or which are presently in "deferred," "delayed," or "low-power" status, should be halted. Reactors that currently closed for safety or economic reasons should be permanently retired. Those plants considered most dangerous should be immediately retired or rapidly phased out unless they are absolutely necessary to meet local energy needs. All remaining nuclear power plants should be closed as soon as possible. Future nuclear power investments should be directed towards developing technically sound and environmentally safe solutions for the long-term storage of nuclear waste and for the safe decommissioning of existing nuclear. Future energy planning should be based on "least-cost" principles whereby investments are made in those energy options which are the least costly based on both direct economic costs as well as environmental and social costs. Thus, funds now proposed to be invested in developing another generation of nuclear plants should instead be invested in improved energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies.
Source and contact: Public Citizen Critical Mass Energy Project, 215 Pennsylvania Ave. SE, Washington DC 20003, tel: (202) 546 4996. Copies of the full study are available for $5/copy; free copies are available to members of the media.