A nuclear plant in Brigham City?
Governor Cox has apparently fallen in love with nuclear energy. Last week he announced rather vague plans to build a nuclear power plant and a training center for nuclear workers in Brigham City.
We will have a lot more to say about this in the future, but we oppose nuclear reactors for multiple reasons. It is the most expensive way there is to boil water and create steam to generate electricity, far more expensive than wind, solar, and battery storage.
Every phase of the nuclear fuel cycle, from the mining of uranium to the storage of toxic waste and decommissioning of the reactors releases radioactivity into the broad environment, i.e. our air, water and soil, even without any accidents. The problems of reactor safety and safe storage of waste have not been solved, especially along the Wasatch Front and the high likelihood of earth quakes. Nuclear power plants take much longer to build than renewables. Eventual decommissioning is necessary, costly, and hazardous.
Only in the past year have some Utah downwinders become eligible for compensation under the expanded Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA), acknowledging decades of fallout from Nevada-site tests. Both Utah Senators Lee and Romney voted against their own constituents getting compensation.
Proposing new nuclear reactors in Utah feels especially tone-deaf when we haven’t even enforced the strictest possible pollution standards at our own power plants. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, Utah ranks 8th-highest in the U.S. for CO₂ emissions per MWh from its electricity sector.
KUTV asked me about the proposal for Utah, and so far there is very little detail about this supposed “nuclear renaissance,” so I asked , “Where’s the water going to come from? What sort of safety zone are they going to establish? What sort of evacuation plan do they have? How large of an area are we talking about? What kind of system are we using? Where is the waste going to be stored?”