SolveClimate is looking for writers, please click here to learn more.
The Nuclear Investment Risk
by Stacy Feldman - Oct 19th, 2007
The new Lieberman-Warner climate bill has a string of supporters, but John McCain of Lieberman-McCain climate fame, is not among them. He’s not endorsing the bill because it’s not nuclear enough.
McCain's affection for nuclear power as a way to displace carbon is no secret. It was a substantial part of his climate bill. So who's going to the foot the bill for this nuclear "renaissance?"
In his interview with Gristmill, McCain explains that the costs of America's nuclear revival would be covered by the proceeds that would flow from his cap-and-trade scheme. From the auction of emissions allowances.
No taxpayer dollars, he said.
Yet, as the interviewer points out, a report by U.S. PIRG and Public Citizen reveals a different tale: McCain's bill would actually authorize $3.7 billion in federal subsidies for nuclear.
If that's true, it's a blank check to an industry that's been moribund for over 30 years, at taxpayers' expense. Nuclear, unproven as a climate solution and all but dead in the US, is a big investment risk. Should the American people -- instead of the eager nuclear industry -- be forced to shoulder the costs of this experiment?
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Post new comment