Latest News

Trump's nuclear reactor plans raise safety concerns

The Trump administration announced a huge nuclear deal earlier this week that provides an incentive of multi-billion dollars for the U.S. Government to issue permits for new Westinghouse Reactors. Critics say the structure is unprecedented and poses safety and environmental risks.

The U.S. Government will help to secure approvals and permits for the $80 billion worth Westinghouse nuclear reactors.

The plan gives the U.S. Government a way to get a share of 20% future profits, and even a possible 20% stake in the firm if it's value exceeds $30 billion by the year 2029.

The deal represents one of the most ambitious plans for U.S. nuclear energy in recent decades. It highlights President Donald Trump's desire to maximize energy production to meet the booming demand in artificial intelligence data centres.

Safety advocates and regulatory experts say that financial incentives could cloud regulatory scrutiny to prevent nuclear accidents. Greg Jaczko is a former Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. He said that Three Mile Island and Chernobyl are three of the most serious nuclear accidents in history.

All of these problems are linked to a lack of regulatory independence.

The White House has said that concerns about safety are unfounded.

The regulatory regime is unchanged and not compromised. The White House stated in an email that there was no agreement about regulatory changes. Cameco, the owner of Westinghouse, declined to comment. Brookfield and Westinghouse have not responded to requests for comment.

TD Cowen's analysts said in a recent research note that they expect Westinghouse will have 10 large-scale nuclear reactors under construction - enough to power several millions of homes - by 2030.

It takes an average of ten years to build a nuclear power plant, mostly due to the complex construction and high costs. Patrick White, an expert in nuclear technology and regulatory issues at the Clean Air Task Force said that effective regulation does not have to be a long or slow process.

White stated that it was in both the companies' and the public's best interests to ensure nuclear regulation is timely and predictable. Todd Allen, an expert in nuclear engineering at the University of Michigan said that the Westinghouse design is well-established, but questioned the speed of the projects.

Allen stated, "With this aggressive timeline and the demand for reactors all over the world, I'm wondering if there is enough manpower to handle these projects."

DURATION DELAYS IN PREVIOUS U.S. WORK PROJECT

Westinghouse was forced into bankruptcy in 2017 by its last nuclear project in the United States, the construction of two nuclear reactors in the Vogtle Power Plant in Georgia.

The cost of the two reactors was about $35 billion and seven years behind schedule, which is more than twice as much as the initial estimate of $14 billion.

Patty Durand has spent many years studying this project. She fears that a fast-tracked permitting process will overlook climate change risks.

She said that severe droughts in Europe and America have forced operators to reduce nuclear power to avoid overheating reactors. Westinghouse had a number of issues with its modular design for the AP1000 reactors. For example, some parts were not sized correctly when they arrived at their site. The AP1000 was also used to build the new reactors. They were built using prefabricated parts, and assembled on-site.

Edwin Lyman is a physicist with the Union of Concerned Scientists. He fears that the Trump administration may exert too much control over the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in order to have the new reactors approved.

(Reporting by Tim McLaughlin and Timothy Gardner; Editing by Nia Williams) (Reporting by Tim McLaughlin, Timothy Gardner and Nia Williams).

(source: Reuters)