Nuclear Power Has No Natural Constituency--But Instead, Natural Enemies
If It's Such a Good Idea, Why Hasn't Nuclear Power Flourished?
Martin recently asked me an insightful question that gave me pause:
My short answer is this:
Nuclear Power has no natural constituency,
But there are many natural constituencies against it
A constituency means a cohesive segment of society that may give political support to a particular policy, party, or goal. A natural constituency is one that, primarily through self-interest, would naturally coalesce around a given thing.
The Day that Changed Everything
On December 2, 1942, humans first initiated a self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction, and controlled it.
Beneath the West Stands of Stagg Field, Chicago, late in the afternoon of that day, a small group of scientists witnessed the advent of a new era in science. History was made in what had been a squash-rackets court. Precisely at 3:25 p.m., Chicago time, scientist George Weil withdrew the cadmium-plated control rod and by his action man unleashed and controlled the energy of the atom. As those who witnessed the experiment became aware of what had happened, smiles spread over their faces and a quiet ripple of applause could be heard. It was a tribute to Enrico Fermi, Nobel Prize winner, to whom, more than to any other person, the success of the experiment was due.
When Less Is More
Normally, self-interest is enough to bring together constituencies, but unfortunately (fortunately?) for Civilization, Nuclear Power consumes very few inputs. Nuclear Fission produces orders of magnitude more useful energy, with orders of magnitude fewer natural resource inputs, than any Engine ever devised by humans. From humanity’s perspective, this is good.
Even better, uranium turned out to be much more abundant than originally believed in the 1940s and 1950s. The good news got even better!
When Less Is Less
As the nuclear power industry developed through the 1970s—massive-scale, highly-regulated pressurized water reactors with enormous budgets—only nation-states could afford to back them, subjecting nuclear power quite directly to election cycles that are decades shorter than planning cycles.
The problem is that uranium turned out to be so cheap and abundant that most uranium businesses make very little profit—and no campaign contributions.
Challenge:
Imagine yourself a major supplier or contractor in the nuclear power industry.
Now that will require as much imagination as you can muster—probably more than you've ever used. Because there is not much of a supply industry supporting Nuclear Power. And that means no campaign contributions here, either.
Measured in tons of natural resource inputs:
The lack of a natural constituency supporting nuclear power is one reason that grassroots groups such as @Dr_Keefer, @DecoupleMedia, @energybants, @Heather_mom4nuk, @i_sodope_, @MadiHilly have been so essential and effective in, for example, saving Diablo Canyon.
All of this should lead to a should be self-evident truth: Nuclear Power faces a large, self-interested, and well-funded natural constituency that opposes Nuclear Power: Big Oil; Big Coal; Big Gas; Big Wind; Big Solar; Big Batteries; even gaZprom. They make campaign contributions.
The Entirety of Civilization is the Natural Constituency for Nuclear Power, But There’s a Knowledge Problem
If enough people had access to objective, fact-based information, it should be clear that Nuclear Power would have the force of the most powerful natural constituentcy on the planet—the whole of humankind.
The appropriate natural constituency for nuclear power is the entirety of civilization. It’s our only on-ramp to a future of resource abundance for the whole planet, not a system that insatiably consumes them.
Andrew Wharton (@Andrejjjjwww)
It is fitting that Ontario Public Generation, and Tennessee Valley Authority, both non-profit, public power organizations, are leading the wide-scale commercialization of the GE-Hitachi BWRX-300 small modular reactor.
These coordinated projects are on track to alter the course of most everything I can see for our shared future. Just a few highlights according to Fermi Energia:
Other major advantages:
Underground Containment
Vertical shaft boring is low-cost (it’s a lot easier to bore a shaft than to construct an above-ground, structural cement dome).
Earth and rock provide natural shielding, strength, and containment.
There is no exposed containment that may be subjected to inadvertent or intentional harm.
Modular Walling Systems
According to MIT’s analysis, The Future of Nuclear Energy in a Carbon-Constrained World, a primary cause of the cost overruns for the Westinghouse AP1000 projects related to the field-construction of reinforced concrete using rebar, primarily for the external containment structure. To address that problem, the DOE has facilitated a new construction technique using modular, fabricated steel units that require very little time to erect and pour. And because the containment is underground, it can rely on structural support provided by the earth.
Steel Bricks™ the UK-based modular steel construction system, has been included in a multi-million dollar funding programme to be delivered by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), aimed at making advanced nuclear construction faster and more affordable.
The U.S. DOE’s National Reactor Innovation Centre is to invest $5.8 million to develop innovative construction technologies to help reduce the cost of new nuclear builds by more than 10 per-cent - as well as significantly speeding up the pace of their development.
Developed by Modular Walling Systems (MWS), based in Renfrewshire, Scotland, the Steel Bricks™ system is fabricated in the UK by leading structural steelworks manufacturer Caunton Engineering. Hailed as a second-generation steel composite structure, the unique proprietary system has been described as ‘high-tech LEGO pieces’ which could significantly reduce the amount of construction labour required to build nuclear reactors on site.
The Steel Bricks™ system is one of three development projects that will be funded by the U.S. DOE’s Advanced Construction Technology (ACT) initiative. GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy, the world-leading provider of nuclear power plant technology, will lead a team to explore promising technologies from other industries and to ensure they are tested to meet the exacting requirements of the nuclear industry.
Steel Bricks™ was recently identified a major component for GE Hitachi’s next generation BWRX-300 Small Modular Reactor (SMR) – targeting a market estimated to be worth US $1.2 trillion globally.
For Modular Walling Systems, the U.S. DOE’s funding endorsement of Steel Bricks™ places the system at the forefront of advanced global nuclear design – especially for the potentially lucrative Small Modular Reactor market.
Costs & Financing
The X-300 is on target to cost about $1 Billion per unit. Construction will take about three years. No longer is nuclear power the exclusive province of nation-states. Its economics are on target to match US pipeline gas power plant costs, meaning that its economics will be several times lower than LNG-produced energy.
In addition to the X-300, several other promising new reactor systems are on the verge of commercialization, such as Natrium, X-Energy, and others. Nonetheless, it should also be apparent that the average person—the people who stand to gain the most from its large-scale deployment—knows little about nuclear power.
Leading to a final question:
What will you do about this?
I decided to play Civilization's pro bono lawyer on Twitter in my spare time. And I've accomplished far more than I ever imagined possible in a few months.
Excellent piece, BR. Brief, but packs a wallop. Could be read and understood by most anyone.
The question: how to get the attention of the masses on this critical topic?
This is why in France, the Greens always insist on the existence of a powerful "nuclear lobby" which cannot exist because all nuclear companies are state-owned.