The House this week overwhelmingly passed legislation aimed at expediting the development of a new generation of nuclear power plants, indicating a shift towards broader political support for this once-controversial energy source in Washington.
The bipartisan vote of 365-to-36 on Wednesday reflected the bipartisan nature of the bill, known as the Atomic Energy Advancement Act. It garnered support from Democrats who see nuclear power as a clean energy source that can operate round the clock to complement solar and wind power, as it does not produce greenhouse gases. Republicans also backed the bill, citing the potential economic and energy security benefits of nuclear power.
Joshua Freed, from the center-left think tank Third Way, noted the bipartisan support for advanced nuclear power, stating, “This is not an issue where there’s some big partisan or ideological divide.”
The legislation would instruct the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to streamline its approval processes for new reactor designs, increase staffing at the commission, reduce fees for applicants, introduce financial incentives for innovative reactor types, and promote the development of nuclear power at retired coal plant sites.
The changes proposed in the bill are described by Representative Jeff Duncan, a lead sponsor of the bill, as “the most significant update to nuclear energy policy in the United States in over a generation.”
Both Republicans and Democrats in the Senate have drafted their own legislation to boost nuclear power. The two chambers are expected to negotiate their differences in the coming months, but final approval is uncertain, given the pending spending bills.
Although nuclear power currently supplies 18% of the nation’s electricity, only three reactors have been completed in the U.S. since 1996. Cost is identified as the primary obstacle facing nuclear power today.
To address the cost issue, several companies are developing smaller reactors that are more affordable to build compared to traditional nuclear plants. The Biden administration has expressed strong support for nuclear power in its efforts to transition away from fossil fuels.
Before new reactors can be constructed, their designs must undergo review by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Some lawmakers have criticized the N.R.C. for slow approvals, citing outdated regulations that may not be suitable for modern reactor designs.
Representative Diana DeGette emphasized the need to modernize the approach to clean energy sources like nuclear power to address the climate crisis and achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2050.
Among other provisions, the House bill would require the N.R.C. to consider not only reactor safety but also the potential benefits of nuclear energy to society. Critics argue that the N.R.C. has historically focused too heavily on risks rather than benefits.
However, some progressive Democrats opposed this provision, expressing concerns that it could compromise reactor safety. The Senate’s nuclear bill does not include this specific language.
Despite potential legislative support, the nuclear industry faces challenges such as utility reluctance to invest in new technologies and historical difficulties in completing projects on time and within budget.
For instance, NuScale Power canceled plans to build six smaller reactors in Idaho due to rising costs and insufficient customer commitments, despite significant federal backing for the project.
