Stop Toxic Pollution Reports
Search
•
RSS Feed
Executive Summary
Constellation Energy has proposed
building a third reactor at the
Calvert Cliffs nuclear power plant in
Maryland. Building a third reactor at
Calvert Cliffs would be expensive, threaten
public health and safety, and damage the
environment. Maryland should oppose
construction of a third reactor.
Encouraged by growing demand for
electricity and generous subsidies in the
2005 federal Energy Policy Act, Constellation
Energy has proposed constructing a
1,600 MWe nuclear reactor next to the two
reactors operating at Calvert Cliffs. The
new plant—larger than any existing nuclear
reactor in the U.S.—would not be completed
until well into the next decade, and
would be licensed to operate for 40 years.Its operation would not be a benefit to
Maryland.
Nuclear power is an expensive energy
source at every stage, from plant construction
to waste disposal and decommissioning.
• Constellation estimates that designing
and building the plant will cost $2.5
billion to $3.0 billion, if the plant is
built on schedule. Cost estimates for
building nuclear power plants are
notoriously inaccurate, however.
Areva, a French-government owned
company and Constellation’s partner
in the proposed third reactor, has
fallen 1.5 years behind on the construction
of a reactor of the same size
and design in Finland, adding $922
million to the cost of the plant.
• Radioactive waste generated at nuclear
power plants must be guarded and kept
from the environment for tens of
thousands of years. Already, the federal
government has spent decades and
billions of dollars trying to devise a
storage solution for nuclear waste
without obtaining a solution to the
problem.
• Cleaning up the plant after its operating
license expires and it has quit
generating power will cost an estimated
$290 to $370 million, excluding
the cost of storing spent fuel and other
radioactive waste.
Constellation Energy and the French
government-owned Areva may seek to shift
the financial risk of the new reactor to
Maryland taxpayers and electricity consumers.
• The federal government has offered up
to $13 billion in subsidies to encourage
the construction of new nuclear powerplants across the country.
• Calvert County has already promised
$300 million in tax breaks to Constellation
if the company builds a new
reactor at Calvert Cliffs. This is equal
to $4,500 per taxpayer in Calvert
County. The new plant will add 450
full-time jobs in the ounty, but at a
cost to taxpayers of approximately
$750,000 per job.
• Despite this massive tax break, Constellation
may seek additional financing
from the state.
• Constellation could also try to force
ratepayers to pay the cost of its license
application, whether or not it decides
to build the reactor, as other utilities
have tried elsewhere.
Building a third reactor at Calvert Cliffs
will threaten public health by dding to the
amount of radioactive material that could
be released through an accident or terrorist
attack involving the plant or its radioactive
waste.
• The new reactor at Calvert Cliffs could
generate an estimated 1,375 tons of
radioactive waste during its 40 years of
operation. This waste will be stored
indefinitely at the site, where it poses
an attractive target for potential
terrorist attacks.
• The two existing reactors at Calvert
Cliffs have been fined for safety
failures. For example, the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) fined
the plant $50,000 in 1996 for problems
with emergency equipment that had
been identified in 1992 but still had
not been repaired four years later.
• If the proposed federal nuclear waste
repository at Yucca Mountain is ever
opened, waste from Calvert Cliffs will
be transported by rail or truck to
Nevada, passing within five miles of
3.1 million people in Maryland. An
accident involving a transport vehicle
could expose thousands to radiation.
Despite claims by the nuclear industry,
nuclear power is not an environmentally
benign source of electricity. The mining
and processing of uranium destroys land,
disproportionately harms native peoples,
and creates toxic and radioactive waste.
Though nuclear power has lower global
warming emissions than electricity generated
from coal or natural gas, it is not an
emission-free power source.
Maryland should refuse to accept the
construction of a new reactor at Calvert
Cliffs. Policymakers at the state and local
levels can take several steps to prevent construction
of a third reactor:
• No additional state or local subsidies
should be offered to Constellation and
its partners to help offset the cost of
constructing a third reactor.
• The application and construction costs
of a new reactor should not be added
to the rate base paid by electricity
consumers.
• The state should adopt a ban on
construction of additional nuclear
capacity unless the country has implemented
a long-term solution for all
radioactive waste that will be produced
at a new plant. Illinois, California and
Wisconsin have already adopted such
laws.
• Maryland should invest in energy
efficiency programs and encourage the
development of clean, renewable
energy sources.
|
