Will the Nuclear Renaissance in the U.S. Pose an Increased Risk to National Security?
Abigail Adams
September 10, 2008
Billed as a green alternative to fossil fuels, and a solution to dependency on foreign oil, nuclear energy in the United States is experiencing a renaissance. There are currently 104 nuclear reactors in the U.S. that generate 20% of the electricity used by the country. However, without license renewals, many of these reactors would cease to operate, and the nuclear energy capacity of the U.S. would decrease to zero by 2040 while the demand for energy in the U.S. is expected to increase by 50%.
The Nuclear Power 2010 Initiative, launched by the Bush administration in 2003, is a partnership between the government, and the nuclear energy industry that was created to reduce the regulatory barriers to the development of new nuclear power plants. As a result of George W. Bush´s requested $114 million in the FY08 budget for the program, and the 2005 Energy Policy Act, which provided tax credits for nuclear production, and Federal Risk Insurance to builders of new nuclear power plants, 20 companies have announced their intention to file licenses for as many as 30 new nuclear reactors.
The anti-nuclear movement in the U.S., which was responsible for instituting many of the regulations in the 1970s that the Bush administration recently revised, has predominantly cited environmental concerns, such as thermal pollution, reactor accidents, and radioactive waste, in their opposition to nuclear power. The nuclear energy industry has responded with an aggressive media campaign to counter public fears about the environmental impact of nuclear power, and has championed nuclear power as a green energy source, due to its lack of air pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions.
The industry claims that advances in science and technology have made nuclear power plants safer then ever before, and claims that fear of nuclear meltdowns are unfounded. However, the diagrams of U.S. nuclear power plants that were found in al-Qaida hideouts in Afghanistan, and the confidential memo circulated by the National Regulatory Commission (NRC) in 2002 that warned of an al-Qaida plot to highjack a commercial aircraft and fly it into a nuclear power plant, have raised a different kind of safety concern about the nation´s nuclear power plants. The fear that nuclear power plants will be a target of terrorist attacks is one that the industry has been lax in addressing.
The NRC is responsible for ensuring that the reactors it has provided licenses for have instituted appropriate safeguards, and security for its nuclear material. It accomplishes this by regulating the accounting systems for nuclear material, and overseeing the security programs and contingency plans at reactor sites. In the wake of September 11 2001, the NRC drafted new security protocols to protect the nation´s nuclear facilities from terrorism. However, in testimony before the Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, and International Relations in 2004, the Government Accountability Office stated that the NRC review process would be unable to determine if the new security plans would protect nuclear facilities from a terrorist attack.
In addition to criticism of the NRC´s regulations, questions have been raised about the competency of private security contractors hired to protect nuclear facilities. The Wackenhut Corporation, a private security firm founded by a former FBI official in 1954, is the largest supplier of security services to nuclear facilities in the country. It holds contracts with 30 nuclear sites, including Vermont Yankee, and has been consistently cited by the NRC for security failures that include lax trainings, cheating on security drills, inappropriate storage of explosives, and keeping a sloppy inventory of nuclear material. In 2004, the NRC restricted access to its reports about lapses in security at nuclear power plants, and hid from the public view its analysis of the performance of security contractors, such as Wackenhut.
The Bush administration´s energy policy has placed a strong emphasis on developing nuclear power as a solution to dependency on foreign energy sources. The regulations that have prevented the construction of new nuclear power plants over the past 30 years are being relaxed, and the renaissance the nuclear energy industry has longed hoped for is on the verge of blossoming. The U.S. has been at war for the majority of George W. Bush´s presidency, and national security has been the foundation for many of the actions of his Administration. Is it possible that his energy policy will subvert the national security that he has devoted his presidency to strengthening? Will the onslaught of new nuclear reactors make the U.S. more vulnerable to a catastrophic terrorist attack? These are question that need to be asked, and answered.
Sources:
U.S. NRC Inspection Reports
Moving Forward With Nuclear Power: Issues and Key Factors. Draft Report. Secretary of Energy Advisory Board. Nuclear Task Force. Department of Energy. January 2005.
GAO Testimony Before the Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, and International Relations. Committee on Government Reform. House of Representatives. 2004.
The Nuclear Power 2010 Initiative, launched by the Bush administration in 2003, is a partnership between the government, and the nuclear energy industry that was created to reduce the regulatory barriers to the development of new nuclear power plants. As a result of George W. Bush´s requested $114 million in the FY08 budget for the program, and the 2005 Energy Policy Act, which provided tax credits for nuclear production, and Federal Risk Insurance to builders of new nuclear power plants, 20 companies have announced their intention to file licenses for as many as 30 new nuclear reactors.
The anti-nuclear movement in the U.S., which was responsible for instituting many of the regulations in the 1970s that the Bush administration recently revised, has predominantly cited environmental concerns, such as thermal pollution, reactor accidents, and radioactive waste, in their opposition to nuclear power. The nuclear energy industry has responded with an aggressive media campaign to counter public fears about the environmental impact of nuclear power, and has championed nuclear power as a green energy source, due to its lack of air pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions.
The industry claims that advances in science and technology have made nuclear power plants safer then ever before, and claims that fear of nuclear meltdowns are unfounded. However, the diagrams of U.S. nuclear power plants that were found in al-Qaida hideouts in Afghanistan, and the confidential memo circulated by the National Regulatory Commission (NRC) in 2002 that warned of an al-Qaida plot to highjack a commercial aircraft and fly it into a nuclear power plant, have raised a different kind of safety concern about the nation´s nuclear power plants. The fear that nuclear power plants will be a target of terrorist attacks is one that the industry has been lax in addressing.
The NRC is responsible for ensuring that the reactors it has provided licenses for have instituted appropriate safeguards, and security for its nuclear material. It accomplishes this by regulating the accounting systems for nuclear material, and overseeing the security programs and contingency plans at reactor sites. In the wake of September 11 2001, the NRC drafted new security protocols to protect the nation´s nuclear facilities from terrorism. However, in testimony before the Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, and International Relations in 2004, the Government Accountability Office stated that the NRC review process would be unable to determine if the new security plans would protect nuclear facilities from a terrorist attack.
In addition to criticism of the NRC´s regulations, questions have been raised about the competency of private security contractors hired to protect nuclear facilities. The Wackenhut Corporation, a private security firm founded by a former FBI official in 1954, is the largest supplier of security services to nuclear facilities in the country. It holds contracts with 30 nuclear sites, including Vermont Yankee, and has been consistently cited by the NRC for security failures that include lax trainings, cheating on security drills, inappropriate storage of explosives, and keeping a sloppy inventory of nuclear material. In 2004, the NRC restricted access to its reports about lapses in security at nuclear power plants, and hid from the public view its analysis of the performance of security contractors, such as Wackenhut.
The Bush administration´s energy policy has placed a strong emphasis on developing nuclear power as a solution to dependency on foreign energy sources. The regulations that have prevented the construction of new nuclear power plants over the past 30 years are being relaxed, and the renaissance the nuclear energy industry has longed hoped for is on the verge of blossoming. The U.S. has been at war for the majority of George W. Bush´s presidency, and national security has been the foundation for many of the actions of his Administration. Is it possible that his energy policy will subvert the national security that he has devoted his presidency to strengthening? Will the onslaught of new nuclear reactors make the U.S. more vulnerable to a catastrophic terrorist attack? These are question that need to be asked, and answered.
Sources:
U.S. NRC Inspection Reports
Moving Forward With Nuclear Power: Issues and Key Factors. Draft Report. Secretary of Energy Advisory Board. Nuclear Task Force. Department of Energy. January 2005.
GAO Testimony Before the Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, and International Relations. Committee on Government Reform. House of Representatives. 2004.
Print
Email
