(note 5/8/12- Please click here to download our “Repeal Price-Anderson” poster and share it with your friends.)
(note 5/29/11- If you’d like a great article on the economics of nuclear power that’s even more in-depth than the Your Car Matters standard, please check out “Subsidies for new nuclear reactors are a ‘bet the farm’ investment” from Enformable Nuclear News.)
March 2011 marked the beginning of the Fukushima-Daiichi disaster, currently the second worst nuclear event in history (behind Chernobyl) and closing fast on the top spot. The nuclear industry in the US was quietly poised for a “renaissance” prior to Fukushima, but the events in Japan have put US nuclear energy in the spotlight again. Two of the people who think there is a window for the reconsideration of US nuclear power are longtime nuclear activists Dr. Helen Caldicott and John Bartels. Dr. Caldicott, a founder of Physicians for Social Responsibility, is author of “Nuclear Power is Not the Answer.” John Bartels was a member of the Eugene (Oregon) Water and Electric Board that owned thirty percent of the one million-kilowatt Trojan Nuclear Power Plant. He
led the fight to refuse to accept electricity from a plant that avoided liability for shutdowns and potential nuclear accidents, causing the plant to be closed and decommissioned ahead of schedule. This month we bring you a plea from Caldicott and Bartels to repeal the Price-Anderson act and make the nuke industry stand on its own, if it can…
Price-Anderson is a 1957 law that limits the liability of nuclear operators in the event of accident. With atomic weapons a new reality in the wake of WWII, President Eisenhower instituted the “Atoms for Peace” program to find civilian uses for nuclear technology. Potential nuclear energy producers looked at the massive liability of any nuclear accident and saw financial disaster. General Electric said it would not proceed “with a cloud of bankruptcy hanging over its head,” and Westinghouse said, “…we could not proceed as a private company without … government backing.” Price-Anderson capped the industry’s liability in event of accident at $10.2 billion (today’s dollars) by creating a pool of insurance companies and industry contributions, and giving the fledgling nuclear industry the security they needed to grow. However, modern nuclear accidents have shown how inadequate this seemingly-large amount is. Chernobyl did about $350 billion in damage, and the costs of Fukushima are expected to reach $250 billion or more. A nuke accident at New York’s Indian Point could be 10 to 100 times more expensive than Fukushima. (please see our article “The Price of nuclear power” for a more detailed explanation)
Price-Anderson is the ultimate example of “socializing the risks and privatizing the rewards”. It’s a lynch pin of the US nuclear industry, because even with insurers and re-insurers the industry couldn’t exist in the “free market” espoused by Cons in every other arena. Caldicott and Bartels believe it’s time for this market-distorting law to go, and they’re joined by a surprising array of groups including the libertarian Cato Institute. Here is an open letter to Congress from Caldicott and Bartels to Congress, along with supporting information on why the repeal of Price-Anderson is so critical.
(An open Letter to Members of the United States Congress from Dr. Helen Caldicott, an experienced medical professional, and former Eugene Oregon Water and Electric Board member, John Bartels.)
This (Fukushima-Daiichi) is the nuclear power catastrophe we and countless others have anticipated since the nuclear meltdown at Chernobyl.
We call upon Members of the United States Congress and President Obama to repeal the Price-Anderson Act that throws liability for nuclear disasters onto taxpayers and utility ratepayers and legislates financial limits on that liability.
We are overriding our instincts, as an experience health professional and electric utility executive, to engage again in all the arguments against the basically misrepresented nuclear power industry. We know from all-too-familiar experience that this debate is unwinnable against the multi-billion dollar industry arrayed against us.
We insist elected representatives finally throw the debate into the marketplace where it belongs. Is nuclear power a good investment? Let the market mechanisms decide.
Our officials don’t have to explain, rationalize or obfuscate. Just vote “yes” or “no.” Let the truth come out so citizens of the world can finally judge on the facts.
Helen Caldicott and John Bartels
A succinct and powerful letter on a subject vital to our continuing national well-being. And here are some of the materials that led Helen and John to their stance…
Nuclear liability: The market-based, post-Fukushima case for ending Price-Anderson
By Mark Cooper, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, October 5, 2011
NY Times OpEd by Dr. Helen Caldicott, April 30, 2011
The Price-Anderson Act: Is It Consistent with a Sound Energy Policy?
CATO Institute Policy Paper, Barry Brownstein, April 17, 1984
The NRC And Nuclear Power Plant Safety In 2011- Living On Borrowed Time
Union of Concerned Scientists Report, February 22, 2012
(If you’re interested in more data specifically on Fukushima, please see our own article What’s the latest on Fukushima? (3/7/2012) for a general Fukushima update, and Fukushima… the ‘Japanese Chernobyl’ a year later and politics still trump safety for some of the latest on TEPCO from UK Progressive.
