Letter: Nuke subsidies must be stopped

Monday, June 16, 2003 | 9:06 a.m.

Your June 12 editorial concerning subsidies to the nuclear industry, headlined "Subsidy that should have been stopped," was right on the mark.

The narrow defeat of a bipartisan amendment that proposed to strike federal financing for nuclear construction projects from the Senate energy bill was a loss to consumers, taxpayers and the environment.

The energy bill is larded with giveaways to prop up the nuclear industry, which, after five decades of commercial operation, is still dependent on government handouts.

Consider the Price-Anderson Act, which artificially lowers insurance premiums for nuclear operators by capping their liability in the event of an accident or attack. The Senate energy bill seeks permanent reauthorization of this irresponsible scheme, without which even the nuclear industry admits that new nuclear power plants would not be viable.

New reactors mean more nuclear waste, additional safety and security risks, and increased taxpayer liabilities. Provisions in the Senate energy bill that promote the construction of new nuclear reactors are among the many reasons why this flawed legislation should not become law. WENONAH HAUTER

Editor's note: The writer, based in Washington, directs the energy and environment program of Public Citizen, the nonprofit, public-interest organization founded by Ralph Nader.