When the temperature drops to well below zero Fahrenheit, who you gonna call for your electricity?
That's what many utilities did two weeks ago when Arctic air gripped over half the population of the U.S. and Canada in colder than cold weather.
According to scientist James Conca writing in Forbes, nuclear "saved the day" as its share of electricity generation soared in order to "relieve natural gas and coal when they failed to deliver on demand.”
Nuclear power normally ranks third in the U.S. for electricity, well behind coal and natural gas, Energy Information Administration figures show.
But things went topsy turvy during those frigid few days, as fossil fuels weren't up to the task. Using New England as an example, Conca noted:
“Natural gas electricity generation faltered so much that regional grid administrator ISO New England had to bring up dirtier coal and oil plants to try to make up the difference. Nuclear energy didn’t have many problems at all and actually became the primary provider of electricity in New England, just edging out gas 29% to 27% (Hartford Business). Oil generation made up 15% while coal accounted for 14%.”
Why couldn't fossil fuels cope? Conca explained:
“Coal stacks were frozen or diesel generators simply couldn’t function in such low temperatures. Gas choked up – its pipelines couldn’t keep up with demand – and prices skyrocketed.”
So much for cheap gas from fracking! Prices did indeed leap, tripling and nearly quadrupling in some instances. Frackers know how to exploit supply and demand as well as anyone does. As utilities required more gas to provide both heat and electricity, purveyors took advantage. For more on this, see my report on the Weinberg Foundation site.
One could then argue that the world needs more fracked gas to increase the supply and keep prices down. But that would mark a shortsighted turn to a fuel that has finite supply, that releases plenty of environmentally damaging CO2, and that is subject to the price volatility that has characterized the fossil fuel industry forever.
The vortex provided a glimpse into what should be the future: Nuclear power, which besides being reliable when the mercury bottoms out, is not subject to price volatility and which is CO2-free during the generation process. Renewables should have a place too - in some U.S. states like Nebraska, wind power helped to rescue over burdened fossil fuels.
But nuclear is the most reliable source of clean, round-the-clock electricity known to mankind. With the right government policies and with suitable funding, the industry is poised to develop reactor types that depart from conventional nuclear and represent major advances in cost, efficiency, safety and usefulness (see list below).
The world would be wise to not freeze them out.
Cover photo is from Rick Schwartz via Flickr
New ways to harness atoms, on SmartPlanet:
- Business! Innovation! Startups! It must be nuclear power
- Bombs away: Key uranium supply to U.S., from Russian weapons, ends. Time for thorium?
- Conventional nuclear giant Areva strikes thorium deal
- Hans Blix: Nuclear must use thorium to reduce weapons risk
- Nobel physicist: Thorium trumps all fuels as energy source
- Novel reactors atop MIT energy contest finalists
- Look who's talking: ExxonMobil says world has to double nuclear
- Bill Gates stop chasing nuclear 'wave', pursues variety of reactors
- A nuclear reactor to clean up the oil sands industry
- As thorium tests begin in Norway, the nuclear industry watches closely
- Alternative nuclear energy race heats up as Canadian company enters
- Turning Japan's nuclear past into its future
- And the DOE energy innovation award goes to ... A new type of nuclear power