Policy Sciences

, Volume 40, Issue 2, pp 101–122 | Cite as

Coal and nuclear technologies: creating a false dichotomy for American energy policy

Article

Abstract

The American electric utility industry is entering a moment of transition. Once viewed as a stable and secure consortium of publicly regulated monopolies that produce and distribute electricity, the industry has weathered market restructuring only to face the ever-present risk of natural disasters, price fluctuations, terrorist attacks, and blackouts. This paper uses five criteria—technical feasibility, cost, negative externalities, reliability, and security—to evaluate the broad portfolio of energy technologies available to American electricity policymakers. Upon close inspection, energy efficiency practices, renewable energy systems, and small-scale distributed generation technologies appear to offer many advantages over large and centralized nuclear and fossil fueled generators. Contrary to the mimetic commentary produced by the media, these three approaches would present policymakers a superior alternative for curbing electricity demand, minimizing the risk of fuel interruptions and shortages, helping improve the fragile transmission network, and reducing environmental harm

Keywords

Renewable energy Energy policy Electric utility industry Energy efficiency Nuclear power Fossil fuels 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author is grateful to the U.S. National Science Foundation for grants SES-0522653, ECS-0323344, and SES-0522653, which have supported elements of the work reported here. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

References

  1. Barton, J. (2003). Future Options for Generation of Electricity from Coal. Hearing Before the Subcommitee on Energy and Air Quality of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. June 24.Google Scholar
  2. Bauer, A., Woods, J., & Hailes, R. (2004). Bioelectricity vision: Achieving 15 percent of electricity from biomass in OECD countries by 2020. London: Center for Energy Policy and Technology.Google Scholar
  3. Beckjord, E. S. (2003). The future of nuclear power: An interdisciplinary MIT study. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  4. Berinstein, P. (2001). Alternative energy: Facts, statistics, and issues. New York: Oryx Press.Google Scholar
  5. Berry, J., & Fischer, S. (2004). More than 200 hospitals nationwide are recycling energy for peak performance. Distributed Energy, January/February: 32.Google Scholar
  6. Black, C. (2003). Future options for generation of electricity from coal. Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, June 24.Google Scholar
  7. Blix, H. (1997.) Nuclear energy in the 21st century. Nuclear News, September, 34–48.Google Scholar
  8. Bodman, S. W. (2006). ITER agreement paves way for clean fusion energy project. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.Google Scholar
  9. Borbely, A., & Kreider, J. (2001) Distributed generation: The power paradigm for the new millennium. New York: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  10. Brown, M. A., Sovacool, B. K., & Hirsh, R. F. (2006). Assessing American Energy Policy. Daedalus, 135, 5–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bush, G. W. (2003). Hydrogen Fuel Initiative can make a Fundamental Difference. Remarks on Energy Dependence at the National Building Museum. February 6.Google Scholar
  12. Business Week (2006). Dark days for energy efficiency. Business Week, 1, 39–40.Google Scholar
  13. Casten, T. (1998). Turning off the heat: Why America must double energy efficiency to save money and reduce global warming. New York: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  14. Catan, T. (2005). Nuclear power wins a revival of interest. Financial Times, 12, 16 July.Google Scholar
  15. Claussen, E. (2004). Global climate change and coal’s future. Remarks at the Spring, 2004 American Coal Council Forum, March 18.Google Scholar
  16. Cohen, A. (2001). National energy policy: Coal, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. March 14.Google Scholar
  17. Cohen, B. L. (1998). Perspectives on the high level waste disposal problem. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 23, 193–203.Google Scholar
  18. Cookson, C. (2004). The hydrogen economy. The Financial Times, September 8:4.Google Scholar
  19. DeCanio, S. J., & Watkins, W. E. (1998). Investment in energy efficiency: Do the characteristics of firms matter? Review of Economics and Statistics, 80, 95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Economist. (2005). Britain ponders a nuclear future. The Economist, 5, 64.Google Scholar
  21. Edison Electric Institute. (2005). Survey of transmission investment, historical and planned capital expenditures, 1998–2008. New York: EEI.Google Scholar
  22. Electric Power Research Institute. (2003). Electricity Technology Roadmap: Meeting the Critical Challenges. New York: EPRI.Google Scholar
  23. Fertel, M. S. (2004). The future of nuclear power. Hearing Before the Senate Subcommittee on Energy and Natural Resources, March 4.Google Scholar
  24. Friedman, S., & Homer-Dixon, T. (2004). Out of the energy box. Foreign Affairs, 83, 72–83.Google Scholar
  25. Gaukler, P., Barnett, S., Rosinski, D. (2002). Putting nuclear terrorism in perspective. Natural Resources and Environment, 16, 141–187.Google Scholar
  26. Gillingham, K., Newell, R., Palmer, K. (2004) Retrospective review of demand-side energy efficiency practices. Washington, DC: National Commission on Energy Policy.Google Scholar
  27. Goett, A., & Farmer, R. (2003). Prospects for distributed generation. Washington, DC: Congressional Budget Office.Google Scholar
  28. Greenwald, J. M. (2005). Keeping the nuclear power option open. Oxford Energy Forum, 1–22.Google Scholar
  29. Gupta, R. (2003). Enhancing energy security. Hearing Before the House Committee on Natural Resources, March 19.Google Scholar
  30. Hafstad, L. R. (1954). Nuclear Power-Its Future. Science, 119, 3A.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Harrington, C., & Murray, C. (2003). Who should deliver ratepayer funded energy efficiency? Washington, DC: Regulatory Assistance Project.Google Scholar
  32. Herman, R., & R. Brustman. (2000). Air pollution deadlier than previously thought. Retrieved from http://www.niehs.nih.gov/centers/2000news/ctrnws4.htm.
  33. Hirsh, R. F. (1999). Power loss: The origins of deregulation and restructuring in the American electric utility system. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Hirsh, R. F. (1989). Technology and transformation in the American electric utility industry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Hirst, E. (2004). U.S. Transmission Capacity: Present status and future prospects. New York: EPRI.Google Scholar
  36. Hoffman, G. W. (1957). The role of nuclear power in Europe’s future energy balance. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 47, 36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Holt, M. (2004). Nuclear energy policy. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.Google Scholar
  38. Institute for the Analysis of Global Security. (2005). The real cost of oil: How much are we paying for a gallon of gas? Retrieved from http://www.iags.org/costofoil.html.
  39. International Energy Agency. (2002). Distributed generation in liberalized electricity markets. Paris: International Energy Agency.Google Scholar
  40. International Energy Agency. (2004). Energy security in a dangerous world. Paris: International Energy Agency.Google Scholar
  41. International Energy Agency. (2006). Variability of wind power and other renewables: Management options and strategies. Paris: International Energy Agency.Google Scholar
  42. Karmis, M., Hirsh, R., & Sovacool, B. (2004). A study of increased use of renewable energy resources in Virginia. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Center for Coal and Energy Research.Google Scholar
  43. Kennedy, R. F. (2005). Nuclear plants vulnerable to attack. Seattle Post-Intelligencer, August 5.Google Scholar
  44. Klass, D. K. (2003). A critical assessment of renewable energy usage in the USA. Energy Policy, 31, 353–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kleinbach, P., & Hinrichs, H. (2002). Energy: Its use and the environment. New York: Harcourt College Publishers.Google Scholar
  46. Lau, K. P. (2005). Outlook for nuclear energy. Presentation at the Oak ridge center for advanced studies, July 6.Google Scholar
  47. Learner, H. A. (2001). Cleaning, greening, and modernizing the electric power sector. Tulane Environmental Law Journal, 277–314.Google Scholar
  48. Leer, S. F. (2003). Energy production on Federal Llands. Hearing Before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, February 27.Google Scholar
  49. Lewis, N. H. (2006) Interpreting the oracle: Licensing modifications, economics, safety, politics, and the future of nuclear power in the United States. Albany Law Journal of Science and Technology, 16, 58.Google Scholar
  50. Lochbaum, D. (2001). Beware of aging reactors, a weak regulator, and vulnerability to terrorists. Testimony Before the Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Property, and Nuclear Safety Subcommittee of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, May 8.Google Scholar
  51. Lovins, A., Datta, E. K., Feiler, T., Lehmann, A., Rabago, K., Swisher, J., Wicker, K. (2002). Small is profitable: The hidden benefits of making electrical resources the right size. Snowmass, CO: Rocky Mountain Institute.Google Scholar
  52. Makarov, Y. (2005). California ISO wind generation forecating service design and experience. Sacramento, CA: California ISO.Google Scholar
  53. Masters, G. M. (2004). Reneawble and efficient electric power systems. New York: Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  54. McCusker, S. M., & Hobbs, B. F. (2003). A nested benders decomposition approach to locating distributed generation in a multi-area power system. Networks and Spatial Economics, 197–223.Google Scholar
  55. Nadel, S. (2001). National energy policy: Conservation and energy efficiency. Hearing before the subcommittee on energy and air quality of the house committee on energy and commerce. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, June 22.Google Scholar
  56. National Academy of Engineering. (2004). The hydrogen economy: Opportunities, costs, barriers, and R&D needs. Washington, DC: The National Academies.Google Scholar
  57. National Energy Policy Development Group. (2001). Reliable, affordable, and environmentally sound energy for America’s future. Washington, DC: Whitehouse Printing Services.Google Scholar
  58. National Rural Electric Cooperative Association. (2004). NRECA white paper on wind. Arlington, VA: NRECA.Google Scholar
  59. Nayak, N. (2005). Redirecting America’s energy future: The economic and consumer benefits of clean energy policies. Washington, DC: Public Interest Research Group.Google Scholar
  60. New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. (2004). New York energy smart program evaluation and status report. Albany, NY: NYSERDA.Google Scholar
  61. Normile, D. (2006). Waiting for ITER, fusion jocks lok east. Science, 311, 992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Nuclear Energy Agency. (2005). Projected costs of generating electricity: 2005 Update. Paris: International Energy Agency.Google Scholar
  63. Ottaviano, D. M. (2003). Environmental justice: New Clean Air Act Regulations and the anticipated impact on minority communities. New York: Lawyer’s Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.Google Scholar
  64. Palast, G., Oppenheim, J., & MacGregor, T. (2003). Democracy and regulation: How the public can govern essential services. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  65. Parformak, P. W. (2003). Liquefied natural gas infrastructure security: Background and issues for congress. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.Google Scholar
  66. Parkins, W. E. (2006). Fusion power: Will it ever come?. Science, 311, 1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Pasqualetti, M. J. (2000). Morality, space, and the power of wind energy landscapes. Geographical Review, 90, 383–385.Google Scholar
  68. Petchers, N. (2003). Combined heating, cooling, and power handbook: Technologies and applications. New York: The Fairmount Press.Google Scholar
  69. Pimentel, D. (2002). Renewable energy: Current and potential issues, Bioscience, 52, 1111–1120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Primary Energy Inc. (2006). Projects-cokeenergy LLC. Retrieved from http://www.primaryenergy.com/facilities/cokenergy.htm.
  71. RAND. (2003). Strengthening the grid: Effect of high-temperature superconducting power technologies on reliability, power transfer capacity, and use. Los Angeles: RAND.Google Scholar
  72. Romm, J. J. (2004). Lots of hot air about hydrogen. Los Angeles Times, March 28, M3.Google Scholar
  73. Rudins, G. (2003). Future options for generation of electricity from coal. Hearing before the subcommittee on energy and air quality of the house committee on energy and commerce, June 24.Google Scholar
  74. Schwartz, P., & Spencer, R. (2005). Nuclear now! How clean, green atomic energy can stop global warming. Wired Magazine, January, 34–42.Google Scholar
  75. Sinclair, M. P. (2002). The nuclear threat to the Great Lakes. Toledo Journal of Great Lakes’ Law, Science, and Policy, 33–47.Google Scholar
  76. Smil, V. (2003). Energy at the crossroads: Global perspectives and uncertainties. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  77. Sovacool, B. K. (2006). The power production paradox: Revealing the socio-technical impediments to distributed generation technologies. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Tech (Doctoral Dissertation).Google Scholar
  78. Sovacool, B. K. (2005). Think again: Nuclear power. Foreign Policy, September, 150.Google Scholar
  79. Sovacool, B. K., & Cooper, C. (2006). Green means go: A colorful approach to a national renewable portfolio standard. Electricity Journal, 19, 19–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. State Energy Advisory Board. (2003). State energy programs: Strong returns based on uncompromising metrics. Washington, DC: State Energy Advisory Board.Google Scholar
  81. Taylor, J., & VanDoren, P. (2002). Evaluating the case for renewable energy: Is government support warranted? Washington, DC: CATO Institute.Google Scholar
  82. U.S. Agency for International Development. (2004). Increasing energy access in developing countries: The role of distributed generation. Washington, DC: USAID.Google Scholar
  83. U.S. Department of Energy. (2001). A roadmap to deploy new nuclear power plants in the United States by 2010. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.Google Scholar
  84. U.S. Department of Energy. (2006). Announcing the global nuclear energy partnership. Retrieved from http://www.energy.gov/news/3171.htm.Google Scholar
  85. U.S. Department of Energy. (2002). Homeland security: Safeguarding America’s future with energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.Google Scholar
  86. U.S. Department of Energy. (2000). Report to congress on the maintenance of viable domestic uranium, conversion, and enrichment industries. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.Google Scholar
  87. U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2003). Monthly energy review June, Table 9.11.Google Scholar
  88. U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2005a). Annual Energy Outlook 2005: With Projections to 2025. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.Google Scholar
  89. U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2005b). International energy outlook 2005. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.Google Scholar
  90. U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2006). Coal news and markets. Retrieved from http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/page/coalnews/coalmar.html.
  91. U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2004). Renewable eenergy: Wind power’s contribution to electric power generation and impact on farms and rural communities. Washington, DC: GAO Printing.Google Scholar
  92. Union of Concerned Scientists. (2004). The renewable electricity standard. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  93. University of Oregon. (2001). Overview of energy storage technologies. Eugene, OR.Google Scholar
  94. Vandenplas, P. (2004). Time to choose the right sight for a fusion reactor. Nature, 428, 119–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Wan, Y.-h., & Parsons, B. K. (1993). Factors relevant to utility integration of intermittent renewable technologies. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory.Google Scholar
  96. Yacobucci, B. D., & Curtright, A. E. (2004). A hydrogen economy and fuel cells: An overview. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.Google Scholar
  97. Yergin, D. (2006). Ensuring Energy Security. Foreign Affairs, 85, 69–82.Google Scholar
  98. Yue, C. D., Liu, C. M., & Liu, E. (2001). A transition toward a sustainable energy future. Energy Policy, 155–163.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State UniversityBlacksburgUSA

Personalised recommendations