Skip to main content

One Nuclear Energy Student Makes the Case for Cost Recovery Laws

Diego Garcia (left) and Gators for long-term energy planning.
Earlier this week, a Florida State Senate committee held a hearing on the state's nuclear cost recovery law. Paul Genoa was on hand to deliver testimony on behalf of NEI, but today I'd like to focus on another individual who testified on Monday.

His name is Diego Garcia. He's a senior at the University of Florida currently and is double majoring in nuclear engineering and political science. He's also president of the campus chapter of the American Nuclear Society. That's him in the picture with a few of his classmates who showed up at Monday's hearing.

So why should we listen to Mr. Garcia? Put simply, nuclear cost recovery laws have been put in place all over the country in order to allow electric utilities to engage in the sort of long-term planning that's desperately needed on the electric grid. And when we're talking about facilities that could potentially be producing emission-free power for up to 60 years, it's safe to say that Diego and his young compatriots at UF have some genuine skin in the game.

Here's an excerpt from his testimony that I found particularly compelling:
It is easy to understand why the debate about nuclear power plant financing has become a topic of debate. I share the same values of accountability and oversight that many have been discussing. However there is much more to the issue than meets the eye; aspects that I have only been able to understand through my full-time studies of energy and the energy markets.

[...]

CO2 burning power stations are much faster and cheaper to build upfront. Nuclear power plants have significantly higher costs because of the magnitude of the infrastructure and the stringent regulatory standards that ensure safety, security and environmental protection. However, the subsequent operating costs (including fuel costs) for nuclear energy are low, making it economically competitive alternative to fossil fuel plants over the life of the plants. The problem of cleaner air is an economic one too. It is laws like the nuclear cost recovery clause that allow our state to move toward 0 emissions and a more stable energy market.

Nuclear energy is the only CO2 –free form of reliable electricity that can provide customers with stable electricity costs for decades. Because of its low operating cost and high reliability, nuclear power is not vulnerable to the price spikes that both oil and natural gas-fired plants can impose on customers. The nuclear cost recovery clause allows the private sector and ratepayers to be able to pass the hurdle of upfront costs in order to provide reliable, affordable, and clean-air energy solutions for our state.
We talk a lot about the future of the nuclear work force here at NEI, and safe to say, we're very anxious to see Diego graduate this Spring and take a job working in our industry. As far as we're concerned, he can't get here quickly enough.

Comments

EntrepreNuke said…
Good job getting out there and bringing some rational thinking to the hearing, Diego.
jimwg said…
Be also nice to challenge the assumption that nuclear energy can't be protective enough by dare asking, is nuclear reactor safety already $$$ overbuilt already??

James Greenidge
Queens NY

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

A Billion Miles Under Nuclear Energy (Updated)

And the winner is…Cassini-Huygens, in triple overtime.

The spaceship conceived in 1982 and launched fifteen years later, will crash into Saturn on September 15, after a mission of 19 years and 355 days, powered by the audacity and technical prowess of scientists and engineers from 17 different countries, and 72 pounds of plutonium.

The mission was so successful that it was extended three times; it was intended to last only until 2008.

Since April, the ship has been continuing to orbit Saturn, swinging through the 1,500-mile gap between the planet and its rings, an area not previously explored. This is a good maneuver for a spaceship nearing the end of its mission, since colliding with a rock could end things early.

Cassini will dive a little deeper and plunge toward Saturn’s surface, where it will transmit data until it burns up in the planet’s atmosphere. The radio signal will arrive here early Friday morning, Eastern time. A NASA video explains.

In the years since Cassini has launc…

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…