Nuclear and hydropower plants provide most zero-emission electricity in the U.S.

OPINION:

Last month in Glasgow, world leaders from nearly 200 countries agreed to increase national ambitions to reduce near-term carbon dioxide emissions while reiterating the long-term focus of achieving net-zero targets around mid-century. To meet those targets, we’re going to need all options, including nuclear power, which is one of the largest sources of carbon-free energy. Numerous countries have committed to using nuclear power to help combat climate change, including the United Kingdom, Canada, France, Russia, Brazil, the Czech Republic and Poland. Unfortunately, the U.S. appears to be sending mixed messages on nuclear power just when we need it most.

Nuclear energy produces electricity for one in five homes and businesses across the U.S., with 93 reactors in 28 states. Together, nuclear and hydropower plants provide most of the zero-emission electricity in the country today and provide firm, dispatchable capacity. As a low-carbon, emissions-free electricity source, nuclear power offers uninterrupted electricity generation, not subject to the availability of sunlight, wind or offsite fuel supply.

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, nuclear power has avoided the equivalent of around 70 gigatons of carbon dioxide emissions over the last half-century, already provides the bulk of clean energy in several countries and can help to decarbonize hard-to-abate sectors such as transportation and industry as we transition towards a net-zero future.

In 2018, California leaders decided to close the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant — the state’s remaining nuclear facility — in 2025. Later in 2018, the legislature approved a bill requiring all sources of electricity to be emission-neutral by 2045. Yet those two actions appear to be incongruous, as the Diablo Canyon plant currently accounts for 15% of the state’s carbon-free electricity production and 8% of overall electricity output.

A 2021 assessment recently issued by MIT and Stanford of the DCNP and its relation to carbon electricity, desalination and hydrogen production highlights the significant environmental and cost savings benefits the plant would provide if it kept operating beyond 2025. 

Specifically, through 2035, the plant would reduce carbon emissions from the electricity sector by 11% per year and save $2.6 billion in power system costs. According to the study, the potential benefits are even larger if operated to 2045 and beyond, saving as much as 50 Mt CO2 in cumulative emissions and $21 billion in power system costs.

Furthermore, the drumbeat for keeping the DCNP open is getting louder. Recently, former Energy Department Secretaries Ernest Moniz and Steven Chu authored an opinion piece, urging stakeholders to revisit their decision to close the plant. Even current DOE Secretary Jennifer Granholm has weighed in, hoping California regulators might reconsider their decision.

At the Electric Power Research Institute, we believe there is no one-size-fits-all approach to reach net-zero by 2050. It requires a portfolio of solutions, which leverages all the tools available in our clean energy toolbox. Advanced nuclear needs to be in the mix, as does clean hydrogen, carbon capture utilization and storage, biofuels, and many other low-carbon resources to drive additional carbon reductions.

Currently, 60% of the electricity in the United States is produced from fossil fuels, and 20% is from renewables, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. The remaining 20% comes from nuclear power. As the next generation of nuclear plants, including small modular reactors, ramps up for deployment, the existing nuclear fleet’s continued operation will remain crucial to maintaining the nation’s capacity for clean energy. The existing fleet’s role could also be expanded to increase its operational flexibility, including extending plants’ operating lives where possible. Very importantly, IEA has reported that nuclear power remains the dispatchable low-carbon technology with the lowest levelized cost of energy in 2025.

Recent activity in Illinois could be used as a blueprint for other states — or even countries — in the pursuit for net-zero. Illinois generates more electricity from nuclear energy than any other state, accounting for one-eighth of the nation’s total nuclear power generation. Earlier this year, Exelon Corporation announced that two of its nuclear plants in the state would continue to operate rather than retire as expected this fall. 

The announcement came after the state legislature and governor approved a clean energy bill supporting carbon-free energy sources, including advanced nuclear power. The state’s nuclear energy plants employ more than 5,400 workers and pay more than $180 million in state and local taxes. Keeping those existing nuclear power plants operating greatly contributes to carbon reductions while maintaining jobs and tax revenue for the state. It’s a win-win situation.

An affordable and reliable clean energy transition depends on understanding regional differences and addressing technical and operational challenges along the way. Whether it’s hydrogen, nuclear or other low-carbon resources, we’ll need all of them if America and the world are going to be successful in making an affordable, reliable and equitable clean energy transition.

• Dr. Rita Baranwal is the Electric Power Research Institute vice president of nuclear and its chief nuclear officer. She previously served as assistant secretary for the Office of Nuclear Energy in the U.S. Department of Energy.