Aligning incentives and the Nuclear industry
After a recent campaign to promote nuclear energy by the nuclear forum and now reading an article about nuclear waste in a German salt mine leaking into the surroundings, I want to write a little something about nuclear energy.
I'm not getting into the debate about pro- or contra this technology, but as we use nuclear power today, the economics of that form of energy are being distorted in favour of the producing company (Electrabel).
Nuclear energy is said to be cheap and indeed Electrabel earns a bundle on it every year. But the side-effects (nuclear waste) fall on the shoulders of society and therefor distort the reality of this technology.
The fix is simple (though highly unlikely to be implemented), reallign the economic effects with the entity making the balance, in other words, have Electrabel foot the bill for the entire cleanup cost of the waste they produce. Only when you do that, you can start to make price comparisons with renewable energy.
Comments
3 comments postedHow to do propose to move the burden to society as a whole to a single company?
With today's technology, it is simply not possible to produce energy from nuclear sources without producing waste which will be a burden to society for some time to come because it cannot be adequately cleaned up. Companies already bear the cost of cleaning up as well as they can -- within the limits of today's technology.
Having said that, I feel strongly that 1) nuclear power is currently the most sustainable form of energy despite the tradeoffs in terms of waste and 2) companies who produce energy from nuclear sources should be investing more in research to find new and more thorough ways to clean up after themselves so that the burden on society can be reduced and one day perhaps completely removed.
Today, Electrabel makes hugh profits on nuclear energy, specially since they can keep their old plants running.
The long-term storage cost of the waste byproducts fall only in part on them but mainly on the taxpayers.
I'm not making an argument in favor or against any solution here, I'm merely pointing out that the benefits are misalligned since most of the downsides are externalities to the operating company. Putting the full cost of that type of energy on the commercial entity behind it would eat at those profits and probably lead to a loss, which in turn will increase the enduser price of nuclear energy and the balance will shift either to cleaner nuclear technologies or to alternative energy sources.
Guy,
this is so real but will never be put in practise due to heavy politic influencer at Electrabel. They sponsor a lot of pressure groups and some politicians.
Too bad but your are 200% right with your point.
Hope to see/talk you soon
Erwin