Carly Matthews
You might think that a self-proclaimed climate advocate would be happy to see cleaner, more reliable energy on the grid. But, you are wrong.
Last month, Constellation Energy announced a deal with Microsoft to reopen its reactor at Three Mile Island, now known as the Crane Clean Energy Center. The reactor is expected to be put into operation in 2028 and operate for at least 20 years. It will not only ensure energy security in the face of explosive growth in energy demand, but also bring economic well-being to Pennsylvania. Reopening the reactor is expected to create more than 3,000 jobs and add $16 billion to Pennsylvania's GDP, according to a report completed by the Brattle Group.
However, actor and activist Jane Fonda declared in the Philadelphia Inquirer that “nuclear power at Three Mile Island is not a climate solution.” Fueled by a decades-long hatred of energy, Fonda makes the bizarre and convoluted argument that America's single largest source of clean energy is not what we need to combat climate change.
To make matters worse, she misled readers by conflating TMI's two reactors. Energy Solutions' Unit 2 suffered a partial meltdown in 1979 and has not been in operation since. Unit 1, owned by Constellation, was one of the country's most reliable nuclear power plants until it was shut down in 2019 for economic reasons. Growing up just an hour's drive south of the facility in south Yorkshire, I remember hearing about the aftermath of the accident. Nuclear power is considered “scary” and “dangerous” by Pennsylvanians who only care about the health and safety of their families. Unlearning this perspective is not easy, but it is necessary.
After all, nuclear energy is one of the safest sources of energy we have. The “radiation” statement is incoherent because the average radiation exposure for people living in Denver, Colorado, is higher than for people working at nuclear power plants. Reactors run 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and are “baseload” energy sources, meaning we can rely on them to power our lives regardless of weather conditions.
While Ms. Fonda is correct that nuclear energy does have higher upfront costs and longer timelines, these costs and time delays are largely due to over-regulation of the industry that prevents us from fully unleashing nuclear energy. However, the more nuclear projects we do, the faster the construction process will be. For example, Georgia Power reduced costs for Units 3 and 4 at the Vogtle plant by 30 percent through immediate lessons learned earlier this year.
As a young person concerned about climate change, I know that nuclear power is definitely part of the solution. Contrary to Ms Fonda's statement that “like two people trying to fit through a narrow doorway at the same time, there is no room for nuclear and renewable energy in our energy future”, I believe we need a comprehensive – above-mentioned approach to energy, emphasis It is clean and reliable nuclear power. For those of us who truly believe climate is an urgent problem that needs to be addressed, this is not an either/or conversation. People like Ms. Fonda who refuse to accept nuclear power as part of the energy mix are simply not serious.
What matters is that my generation and Pennsylvanians agree with me. A recent Pew Research Center poll found that 56% of Americans support new nuclear power, and an August poll of Pennsylvania voters found that 70% supported nuclear power and 56% supported reopening TMI Unit 1, more than twice as many opponents. The consensus is clear: Nuclear power will be a key part of reducing emissions, improving energy security and creating American jobs in the coming years.
Viewing nuclear power as dangerous and unrealistic for our climate goals is an outdated and unrealistic argument. Ms. Fonda, the choice is obvious, but somehow you made the wrong choice.
Karly Matthews is the Vice President of Communications for the American Conservation Union (ACC). She was born and raised in central Pennsylvania and graduated from Temple University in 2020. @Karlymatthews_.
This article was originally published by RealClearEnergy and provided via RealClearWire.
Relevant
