This NEI report captures the scope of nuclear energy’s contributions to the national economy, energy landscape, and tracks potential, premature nuclear plant closures.
This new analysis estimates that if the four Ohio and Pennsylvania nuclear plants now scheduled for retirement were to continue operating, their output would offset substantial fossil generation from gas and coal plants.
The recent trend of nuclear plant closures is causing fiscal pain for municipalities that rely on revenue from the plants and creating political pressure for state subsidies to forestall further shutdowns.
The eighth in the MIT Energy Initiative’s Future of series, which aims to shed light on a range of complex and important issues involving energy and the environment.
Declining Profits, Plant Closures, and the Threat of Rising Carbon Emissions
In this report, The Horinko Group presents its analysis and findings with respect to two key issues: (1) nuclear power’s significant contribution to minimizing the CO2 emissions of the electricity sector; and (2) CPP compliance pathways that best value nuclear power’s contribution for a clean energy future.
The world must use all low-carbon energy sources, including nuclear energy, if it is to limit climate change while still meeting development goals.
Many environmentalists have opposed nuclear power, citing its dangers and the difficulty of disposing of its radioactive waste. But a Pulitzer Prize-winning author argues that nuclear is safer than most energy sources and is needed if the world hopes to radically decrease its carbon emissions.
Can a unified path for development and conservation lead to a better future?
The plants that have closed or announced closure were all highly reliable plants with high capacity factors and relatively low generating costs. Allowing these facilities to close will have long-term economic consequences: replacement generating capacity, when needed, will produce more costly electricity, fewer jobs that will pay less, and more pollution.
Creating a streamlined and predictable licensing pathway to deployment.
An analysis by the Nuclear Energy Institute.
Meeting international climate goals of limiting temperature increases to 1.5-2 degrees Celsius will require current emission levels to be reduced by 40 80% by 2050 and near zero or negative by 2100.
This legislation established a statewide energy policy and opened the door to nuclear generation along with an expanded menu of renewable and alternative energy sources, efficiency, and conservation programs to provide Alaskans more energy choices at lower cost.
Memorandum for the Trump Transition Team.
NEI’s survey of opinions toward nuclear energy was conducted from Sept. 21 to Oct. 1, 2016, with a nationally representative sample of 1,000 adults.