On August 3, 2015, U.S. President Obama and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency released the final draft of the Clean Power Plan – ” a historic and important step in reducing carbon pollution from power plants that takes real action on climate change. Shaped by years of unprecedented outreach and public engagement, the final Clean Power Plan is fair, flexible and designed to strengthen the fast-growing trend toward cleaner and lower-polluting American energy. With strong but achievable standards for power plants, and customized goals for states to cut the carbon pollution that is driving climate change, the Clean Power Plan provides national consistency, accountability and a level playing field while reflecting each state’s energy mix. It also shows the world that the United States is committed to leading global efforts to address climate change.”
The role of nuclear power has been a major issue in drafting the CPP. Proponents claim that nuclear power is a low-carbon source and should be included in the mix of supported technologies. Critics say that there are a lot of uncounted costs and uncertainties to nuclear power so it should not be included in the mix.
One of the big questions with respect to nuclear power is what to do about the existing nuclear power plants that may have to close because they cannot compete with cheap natural gas and oil. Supporters of nuclear power say that the Clear Power Plan should include financial support for low carbon nuclear power plants that are not competitive.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has the mandate to cancel the license of any nuclear power plant that cannot make a profit for the owners. Two plants have already been close in the U.S. recently because one was losing money and no buyer could be found. The other was deteriorating and was too expensive to repair. IN 2013, six nuclear plants were listed by Moningstar as being at risk for shut down due to economic problems,
1. Indian Point, NY, owned by Entergy
2. Ginna, NY, Exelon
3. Fitzpatrick, NY, Entergy
4. Three Mile Island, PA, Exelon
5. Davis Beese, OH, FirstEnergy
6. Pilgrim, MA, Entergy
Exelon has also been expressing concerns about its Byron, Quad Cities and Clinton plants in Illinois. They have been pressing for cancelation of tax breaks for wind power and asking for state money to help the power plants stay in operation.
Unfortunately for these existing plants, the final draft of the CPP offers no support. The EPA states that “On further consideration, we believe it is inappropriate to base the BSER (Best System of Emission Reduction) on elements that will not reduce CO2 emissions from affected electric generating units below current levels. Existing nuclear generation helps make existing CO2 emissions lower than they would otherwise be, but will not further lower CO2 emissions below current levels. Accordingly… the EPA is not finalizing preservation of generation from existing nuclear capacity as a component of the BSER.”
So the final draft of the CPP will not support direct aid or endorse state aid to these uncompetitive aging nuclear power plants as part of the national plan to support sources of energy that reduce carbon emissions. Ultimately, the CPP took a compromise position with respect to nuclear power.
