Skip to main content
Move the World.
Three Reasons We Don't Have More Nuclear Power in the U.S.

In an episode of our series Challengers, we introduced you to Transatomic. The nuclear startup, headed by Dr. Leslie Dewan, has a plan, a team, and VC backers. But even compared to the other startups we’ve profiling for this series, Transatomic faces some particularly high hurdles. The biggest of which is a multi-decade decline in the popularity of nuclear power.

The reasons for nuclear’s spot on the back burner often get over-simplified. The meltdowns at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island obviously had something to do with a change in public sentiment, but it’s actually more complicated than that. Here’s a more nuanced list of reasons why building a next-generation of nuclear power plants is an uphill climb.

1) Building a nuclear power plant is expensive

“More than safety or waste issues, cost is nuclear's Achilles' heel,” writes Brad Plumer, who covers energy for Vox, in an excellent primer on America’s conflicted relationship with nuclear power. “Modern-day reactors have become jarringly expensive to build, going for $5 billion to $10 billion a pop.” That’s probably going to be true for the nuclear reactors of the future, too — at least in the U.S., where overlapping regulations have upped the cost of doing business.

The big question for nuclear power is whether it can be competitive without massive subsidies.

And at a time when so many other forms of energy are so much cheaper, the big question for nuclear power is whether it can be competitive without massive subsidies. A report from Third Way, suggests that there is private funding for nuclear — roughly $1.3 billion worth as of 2015. Whether private capital can provide all of the funding necessary to build an advanced nuclear reactor isn’t clear.

TerraPower, a nuclear startup co-founded and chaired by Microsoft’s Bill Gates, will need roughly $5 billion to build a prototype traveling wave reactor. So they’ve decided their first plant won’t be in the U.S., but China, where the government is pursuing nuclear power with more gusto (and subsidies) than any other country on the planet.

reactorfblink2
A rendering of Transatomic's reactor

2) Fossil fuels are cheap, and wind and solar are getting less expensive

Nuclear has two big selling points: it’s environmentally friendly, and it can produce power on a larger scale than any other energy source. But as we discussed above, it’s not cheap to build a plant, and it also takes a while. According to the Nuclear Energy Agency, “it is typically expected to take 5 to 7 years to build a large nuclear unit (not including the time required for planning and licensing).” That’s a longer build time than even big coal plants (four years) and natural gas plants (three years).

reactorfblink3
The Rancho Seco decommissioned nuclear power plant (Image via DOE)

And while solar and wind can’t produce energy at anywhere near the level of nuclear (or even coal and gas), the cost of each technology has decreased by 80 percent and 60 percent respectively since 2009, according to the financial firm Lazard.

In a 2015 report comparing costs between conventional and alternative energy models, Lazard found that wind and utility-scale solar are “cost-competitive with conventional generation technologies in some scenarios, despite large decreases in the cost of natural gas.” The construction times are also much shorter: Nine months for several utility-scale solar options, 12 month for wind turbines.

Solar technology...had a net output of 110 megawatts, wind technology had a net output of 210 megawatts. For nuclear reactors? 1,100 megawatts.

Where is nuclear superior? Output. The highest-energy producing solar technology Lazard reported on had a net output of 110 megawatts, while the highest-energy producing wind technology had a net output of 210 megawatts. For nuclear reactors? 1,100 megawatts.

Solar and wind are still just in the supplementary energy stage. Until there’s an affordable way to store the energy they produce, they work only when it’s sunny or windy out. Or as Austin Energy’s Khalil Shalabi told The New York Times in 2014: “Renewables had two issues: One, they were too expensive, and they weren’t dispatchable. They’re not too expensive anymore.”

Cheap natural gas and increasingly cheaper renewables are dissolving the sense of urgency that nuclear arguably needs to succeed.

3) People in the U.S. don’t think about nuclear power very often

Energy policy doesn’t get made in a vacuum. Consumers have to want it and investors and energy workers have to fight to protect and expand their markets. Even the media plays a role. The prevalence of coal plants, for instance, is driven in part by its availability and affordability, but also by workers in coal country and consumer demand for cheap utility bills. Renewables are gaining in popularity and falling in price because subsidies drive adoption, which lures private investment, which funds more R&D, which increases the appeal for consumers.

Essentially, a constellation of actors — from regular folks to investors to government officials to people in the energy industry — have traditionally been necessary for an energy model to be successful. And nuclear just doesn’t get that kind of attention here in the U.S.

70 percent of Americans don’t know nuclear power plants produce more clean energy than any other alternative energy source.

A 2015 survey from the Nuclear Energy Institute found that 70 percent of Americans don’t know nuclear power plants produce more clean energy than any other alternative energy source; nearly 60 percent of Americans are “fence-sitters” when it comes to whether the U.S. should use more nuclear energy; and that only 11 percent feel “very informed” about nuclear power. Combine that data with the fact that there are only 61 operational nuclear power plants in the U.S. — compared to over 400 coal plants, more than 1,000 petroleum plants, and nearly 2,000 natural gas plants — and it’s little wonder that Americans aren’t clamoring for more nuclear power. It’s just not on their radar.

Paradoxically, the U.S. produces more nuclear power than any other country, but only 19% of our total power comes from those plants; whereas 13 countries with fewer nuclear power plants get more than 25 percent of their power from them.

Up Next

Food
This Ice Cream Is Made from Lab-Grown Vegan Milk
lab-grown vegan milk
Food
This Ice Cream Is Made from Lab-Grown Vegan Milk
Disappointed by available milk alternatives, the startup Perfect Day developed lab-grown vegan milk that’s molecularly identical to the kind from cows.

Disappointed by available milk alternatives, the startup Perfect Day developed lab-grown vegan milk that’s molecularly identical to the kind from cows.

Medical Innovation
At-Home Breast Cancer Screening, Powered By AI
at-home breast cancer screening
Medical Innovation
At-Home Breast Cancer Screening, Powered By AI
An award-winning at-home breast cancer screening device, called the Blue Box, could one day replace uncomfortable mammograms.

An award-winning at-home breast cancer screening device, called the Blue Box, could one day replace uncomfortable mammograms.

Future of Food
These Pioneers are Building the Sustainable Food Systems of Tomorrow
These Pioneers are Building the Sustainable Food Systems of Tomorrow
Future of Food
These Pioneers are Building the Sustainable Food Systems of Tomorrow
In a new Freethink original series, Michael O'Shea goes around the world to introduce us to the scientists who are working hard to ensure that we can feed our future world.

There are currently over 7 billion human beings alive on Earth --- and in 2050 the world's population will rise by almost 2 billion. That's a lot more mouths to feed considering that roughly 11 percent of the world goes hungry today. "in the next 40 years, we need to produce the same amount of food as we did over the last 8,000 years." Ernst van den...

Future of Food
A Look Inside Farms of the Future
A Look Inside Farms of the Future
Watch Now
Future of Food
A Look Inside Farms of the Future
With a growing population, changing consumption behavior and a climate crisis, how will we feed our future world?...
Watch Now

With a growing population, changing consumption behavior and a climate crisis, how will we feed our future world? The answer may not be increasing resources--land, water, and employees--but rather improving production efficiency. The key question: How do we increase the amount of food we produce while using the same or fewer resources? In the first episode of our original series, Future of Food, we take a look at...

Innovation
Hacking Surfboard Fins to Fight Climate Change
Hacking Surfboard Fins to Fight Climate Change
Watch Now
Innovation
Hacking Surfboard Fins to Fight Climate Change
How can a surfboard modification help save the oceans?
Watch Now

He doesn’t surf, he doesn’t code, but he’s hacking surfboard fins to combat climate change and it’s working. Meet Andy Stern, citizen scientist and founder of Smartfin. He's brought together surfers and oceanographers to create a smart surfboard fin that's collecting vital data to track and fight climate change. As far as oceans go, the environmental crisis doesn't just affect the icebergs - it affects all of us. Surfers...

Wrong
3 Times Our Brightest Minds Made Bad Predictions
3 Times Our Brightest Minds Made Bad Predictions
Wrong
3 Times Our Brightest Minds Made Bad Predictions
Some of the predictions might look outlandish now, but at the time they actually seemed quite plausible.
By Michael O'Shea

Some of the predictions might look outlandish now, but at the time they actually seemed quite plausible.

Challengers
Let's Talk About Failure
Let's Talk About Failure
Challengers
Let's Talk About Failure
Are we fetishizing failure? What are the costs of failing? How do we bounce back after it inevitably happens?
By Mike Riggs

Are we fetishizing failure? What are the costs of failing? How do we bounce back after it inevitably happens?

Change Agents
Could Ugly Produce Change the World?
Could Ugly Produce Change the World?
Watch Now
Change Agents
Could Ugly Produce Change the World?
Meet the startup that wants to sell you ugly fruits and veggies
Watch Now

As much as 40 percent of the food grown, processed, and shipped for human consumption in the United States will never make it into a human’s mouth, according to Feeding America, a nonprofit group that coordinates food banks. That comes out to roughly 70 billion pounds of tossed food each year. One California startup is trying to reduce that number by selling fruits and vegetables that are too “ugly” to occupy the produce...