Solar Is A Bargain Deal Compared To Nuclear

Proponents of nuclear energy rely on three key reasons our country should develop new nuclear reactors rather than invest in cleaner solar power. One: They claim nuclear is cheaper than alternatives. Two: They say it is more efficient. Three: They say it relies on existing technology.

Well, as for existing technology, I won't point them to the thousands of homes already outfitted with solar and a growing number of power plant-scale installations. Let me tackle their first argument for now. Lately, a growing number of reports now indicate that solar energy has overtaken the nuclear behemoth when long-term costs are compared.

For one, construction of any new nuclear plants would be impossible without pushing all the financial risk onto taxpayers. This would be no problem if reactors functioned properly, but history tells us a different story. The last generation of nuclear plants left taxpayers on the hook for more than $300 billion in bailouts and rate hikes following 'mishaps.'

All signs indicate that the new class of reactors will be just as problematic. A report by Mark Cooper of Vermont Law School found that, of 19 applications to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, nearly all "had some type of delay or cancellation, run into a design problem, suffered cost increases and/or had the utility bond rating downgraded by Wall Street."

That's the point at which solar energy begins to muscle out nuclear for the title of 'cheapest' renewable energy source. Moreover, a Duke University study similarly concludes that solar PV plants now generally cost less than nuclear plants and calls the switch a "historic crossover."

So now you might be thinking, 'Well, we want to get off fossil fuels, right? So why does it have to be one or the other?' But that's what it might come down to since, according to Earth Track founder Doug Kaplow, the two technologies are going to head-to-head in accessing new energy markets. Nuclear funding, therefore, directly impedes solar's spread.

Despite all of this, it seems nuclear is coming out ahead in the renewable power competition. The reason: cold, hard cash. In 2008 and 2009 alone, the Nuclear Energy Institute, one of the industry's largest lobby groups, spent more than $4 million lobbying on behalf of a new generation of reactors.

Unfortunately, in the past, nuclear energy's lobbying prowess has worked; this appears to be continuing. Between 1943 and 1999, Uncle Sam spent a whopping 96 percent of its $151 billion on renewable subsidies on the nuclear industry. President Obama has continued that tradition. Earlier this year he promised a huge increase in federal loan guarantees for new reactors to $55 billion.

We are at a crossroads. For potentially the first time, there's a growing recognition that solar could be the vanguard of a renewable energy revolution not rooted in deep pockets or political influence. To do this, however, our leaders will have to take a clear-eyed look at the nuclear industry today. Our pocket books and climate depend on it.

Photo credit: Mountain/\Ash

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter.