Experts Weigh Nuclear Power Option For Ohio

Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Topics: Environment, Politics
RSS  Short URL  Share

Debate over benefits of a possible nuclear power plant in Piketon is heating up. Experts discuss pros and cons of local investment in nuclear energy.

Debate over the benefits of a possible nuclear power plant in Piketon is heating up.

Officials announced last Thursday that they are considering the site of a former uranium enrichment plant south of Columbus as the future home of a third Ohio nuclear plant. They say it would supply power to one million households.  But it would cost at least 10 billion dollars to build and require taxpayer subsidies for a sizeable portion of that.

This morning on 90.3’s Sound of Ideas, experts weighed in on the pros and cons of building another nuclear power source.

Philip Taylor, a professor of physics at Case Western, says paying back the estimated 10 billion dollar construction cost of the plant is the biggest issue.

TAYLOR: IF YOU DIVIDE 10 BILLION BY 1 MILLION, YOU GET 10,000. SO EACH HOUSEHOLD, TO BE SUPPLIED WITH THIS ELECTRITY, IN FACT HAS TO COME UP WITH $ 10,000, AND I THINK IF YOU APPROACH MOST HOUSEHOLDS AND ASK I F THEY’D LIKE TO PUT THAT MONEY DOWN, THEY’D SAY ‘NO.’

But Clean Energy America, a national advocacy group FOR nuclear power says the costs have to be weighed against the alternatives. Amy Roma is a spokesperson with the group.

ROMA: NUCLEAR POWER IS EXPENSIVE BUT WHAT YOU GET AT THE END OF THE DAY IS, YOU KNOW IF YOU BUILD A 2 REACTOR PLANT YOU’RE GOING TO GET 2600 MEGAWATTS OF ELECTRICITY BEING GENERATED 24 HOURS A DAY 7 DAYS A WEEK. IF YOU LOOK AT LOOKING TO CREATE SOMETHING OF A SIMILAR SIZE FROM A WINDPLANT OR A SOLAR PLANT WE’RE JUST NOT THERE RIGHT NOW.

You can hear the full debate on the Sound of Ideas.