Nuclear power cannot solve the climate crisis or prevent the millions of lives and trillions of dollars that will be lost to its impacts. The path to pollution-free energy is more complicated, and more ambitious.

The news that the General Services Administration has contracted to secure electricity from nuclear plants for 14 federal agencies is a reminder of how much is yet to be done to establish conditions for an economy free of climate pollution and its related costly and damaging effects. This would not be the approach to lower carbon energy if we were developing and activating the ingredients of a genuine zero pollution economy. 

While the announcement describes nuclear power as “carbon pollution free”, it is not 100% free of carbon pollution; nor is nuclear energy pollution free. Just read the annual reports on effluents (atmospheric and marine pollution) from nuclear power plants. They all emit radiation and toxins into the environment, and the reporting itself is mostly voluntary and usually delayed until months after a given incident. Often, the precise nature, volume, or timing, of a release of radioactive effluents is not even made clear in the report. Plant operators characterize many smaller releases as “not reportable”.

The federal government goal of 100% carbon-free energy matching by 2030 is certainly laudable, and helps send a strong signal to industry to emulate the government standard and shift to clean energy. The “matching” concept, however, and dependence on polluting practices create the risk of accounting gimmicks getting in the way of material emissions reductions. It is also important to note that all forms of pollution degrade ecosystems and undermine nature’s ability to sink carbon and slow global heating.

Does this new infusion of public money do better in terms of climate risk and resilience than if it spurred a boom in new carbon emissions? Most likely, yes. Will it achieve that long-promised future of nuclear power without pollution that also eliminates dangerous nuclear waste? Mostly likely not. All plans to extend or expand nuclear power production should come with intensive plans for limiting effluents to zero, with detailed reporting to and coordination with local communities to establish a zero harm standard for human and environmental health.

Were the US to fully embrace pollution-free energy, we would see:

1. Comprehensive binding standards for pollution free mining and refining of raw materials;
2. Incentives to reward advanced compliance with those standards and development of relevant technologies, business models, and related job creation;
3. Funding for advanced R&D into new energy storage technologies, including device batteries, vehicle batteries and fuel cells, and industrial or utility-scale storage systems;
4. Strong, progressive carbon pricing policies that make it harder to profit from pollution and return revenues to households and local economies;
5. Incentives for new energy ventures focused on decentralized production, storage, asset management, and distribution of clean energy;
6. Incentives and investment to achieve accelerated depreciation of dirty energy assets, including contracts, infrastructure, and financial arrangements (accelerated depreciation makes it more economically feasible to rapidly transition away from customary but pollution-intensive practices);
7. Multi-state and multilateral cooperative agreements to share tech, financing, data, and accelerated depreciation timelines;
8. Incubators at city, state, and national levels, to support radical innovation in nano-scale solar power generation and related technological breakthroughs;
9. Strategies for moving marginal, rural, post-industrial and new industrial communities to zero pollution practices for both energy and industry;
10. Upstream-downstream cooperative action—and investment—to reduce pollution pressures on watersheds and ecosystems, to ensure the conservation and restoration of biodiversity (and by extension) a healthier and more resilient global carbon cycle);
11. Coordinated support for a shift to climate-smart banking focused on expanding value and activity under all of the above, in line with measurable multidimensional climate value;
12. Consistent pressure through diplomacy and trade negotiations to bring international partner economies and global markets in line with critical climate goals.

The point here is: We can do better; we must do better; polluting systems are not an answer to our dependency on polluting systems. The climate crisis will bring more harm, cost, and destabilization, across the world, than any prior global challenge. We need to identify, develop, and deploy, true zero pollution systems as soon as possible—which is far faster than any government is so far planning for.

Stay tuned for more on these 12 elements of the pollution-free economy, and the many opportunities they each open up.

---

FEATURED IMAGE