Greener energy

OPINION:

We live in a modern energy age. But imagine a world without the Internet, cell phones or cable. Imagine if we had to return to that world where we couldn’t go straight to Google or instantly reach out to family across the country a world without access to technology at our fingertips.

It is our access to energy that allows us to make such innovative strides in technology, to grow our economy and to improve our population’s standard of living.

But such advancement does not come free of charge. It comes with a price that will require a 25 percent increase in electricity by 2030 if we are going to meet the rising demand. And it comes wrapped in the most daunting challenge facing America in the 21st century — meeting our vast energy needs without causing further damage to the environment or impinging upon the development of our economy. These are the three pillars of the modern energy age — energy security, the economy and the environment.

As we enter into this new energy age, the United States must take a global leadership role that embraces a broad mix of traditional renewable and alternative energy sources, including wind, solar, cleaner coal, natural gas and nuclear energy. However, whereas no single energy technology will solve our nation’s needs, no single energy solution will be complete without the inclusion of nuclear technology.

For one, it is the most environmentally friendly source of all clean-air electricity options. In the latest report from the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), nuclear power was distinguished as an integral part in humanity’s attempt to mitigate the effects of climate change. This is because nuclear power plants emit zero greenhouse gases or pollutants related to ground-level ozone formation, smog or acid rain.

Currently, nuclear power accounts for 20 percent of our nation’s energy without carbon emissions. But because we have not built a power plant since 1986 and because our electricity demands continue to rise exponentially, that percentage will dwindle down to 15 percent by 2030 and eventually to zero as the last American plants are decommissioned. This will result in growing reliance on imported fuels and carbon-based power. In fact, a failure to invest in the creation of new nuclear plants not only impacts the state of our environment, but it also affects the state of our economy. As the price of oil exceeds $100 a barrel and our economy hints at a recession, the American public is understandably growing more concerned about our energy policies.

This apprehension, however, must be converted into an opportunity for economic development. And nuclear power can play a vital role in that respect.

The average nuclear plant, for instance, generates approximately $430 million in production of goods and services andprovides more than $20 million in state and local tax revenue benefiting schools, roads and infrastructure. Additionally, each nuclear plant provides around 1,400-1,800 construction jobs, and 400 to 700 permanent positions to support continued operations. As evidenced by statistics from the Department of Labor, these are well-paying jobs with the median annual salary for nuclear engineers standing at $82,900 — which is some $8,000 higher than all other engineering disciplines except petroleum engineering. These high wages, in addition to a burgeoning demand for nuclear engineers, has translated into an increasing number of students seeking degrees in the field, according to the Energy Department.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon was correct when he asserted that we stand on the cusp of a new era: “the age of green economics.” Investing in these “green collar” jobs must be a central theme in order to ensure that we have a stable and secure economy for the future.

It’s therefore no wonder that nuclear energy is experiencing a renaissance of sorts in the international community. Last month, the British government started planning for the creation of 10 new reactors; China and India are embracing nuclear power at lightening speed; and France continues to produce 78 percent of its electricity from nuclear plants. This policy not only diminished France’s reliance on foreign energy, but it also positioned it as having one of the lowest rates of greenhouse gas emissions in the developed world — an example the United States should soon follow as one of the world’s leading emitters of greenhouse gases.

It is for such reasons — energy demand, economics and the environment that, as secretary of Energy, I launched the Nuclear Power 2010 Program and the Next Generation Nuclear Plant project, both of which sought to develop an advanced nuclear energy system that produced inexpensive electric power. And it is for these reasons that support for nuclear energy has seen a burst of renewed interest here in the United States among even non-traditional supporters who have warmed to nuclear power as part of the energy debate and climate-change solution.

Nuclear power provides the energy we depend on every day, supports our economy and protects our environment. Ensuring that clean, safe, affordable power remains within our reach — or at our fingertips — is an issue that touches all our lives and is reason enough to support the expansion of nuclear power in America. Our way of life depends on it.

Former Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, who also served in the Senate, is a member of the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition.