The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection recently held a listening session at Carnegie Mellon University to hear from members of the local community on Pennsylvania’s implementation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan. This session was one of many being held across the commonwealth so that residents can share their perspective on how Pennsylvania should comply with new rules to reduce carbon emissions from fossil-fuel power plants.
The clean power plan is the first to set targets for the reduction of carbon pollution from power plants. It gives states flexibility in terms of how to meet the new standard, including whether to cut the overall mass of carbon emissions to a certain number of tons or to reduce the rate of emissions per megawatt hour of electrical generation.
I encourage Pennsylvania to adopt a mass-based approach, encompassing both existing and new power plants. This would place a single, clear and equitable price on carbon emissions and allow power plants to compete to achieve emissions reductions.
Such an approach has already been used successfully by the EPA to address a variety of pollutants, including those that cause acid rain. And it would ensure that Pennsylvania power generators benefit from the investments they already have made to reduce emissions.
A mass-based approach also would be the most cost-effective way for Pennsylvania to meet these goals because it would advantage all low- and zero-carbon resources. This includes properly crediting our existing nuclear power plants for their ability to provide carbon-free, reliable electricity.
Pennsylvania’s nuclear power plants produce 93 percent of the state’s emission‐free electricity, meaning they are our largest single source of clean electrical energy. They are also the only emissions-free source that can produce large amounts of electricity reliably around the clock.
In 2013, the state’s nuclear power plants prevented 63 million metric tons of carbon-dioxide emissions. This is the amount of emissions that would have poured into our atmosphere if the power generated by nuclear energy had instead been generated by the mix of other sources now producing electricity in Pennsylvania. It also is equivalent to what would be released in a year by some 12 million passenger cars — more than twice as many as are registered in the commonwealth.
Beyond their environmental benefits, nuclear-power plants deliver tremendous economic benefits to Pennsylvania. According to a recently released report from the Brattle Group, Pennsylvania’s five nuclear power plants contribute $2.36 billion to the state gross domestic product and directly account for 15,600 full-time jobs.
Nuclear power also is reliable and available around the clock, and it now represents almost 35 percent of Pennsylvania’s electricity generation.
Finally, a quick note on safety — U.S. nuclear plants are among the safest and most secure industrial facilities in the world. Multiple automatic safety systems, extensive training regimens, paramilitary security forces, an industry commitment to comprehensive safety procedures and stringent federal regulation keep nuclear-energy facilities, employees and neighboring communities safe.
As DEP contemplates how best to implement the clean power plan, a path that lowers emissions while remaining cost-effective seems like common sense. I hope Pennsylvania adopts a mass-based approach that maintains the benefits of our existing nuclear fleet for the sake of cleaner skies, the state economy and our long-term energy security.
Forrest J. Remick is emeritus professor of nuclear engineering and emeritus associate vice president for research at Penn State University and a retired commissioner of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
First Published: October 13, 2015, 4:00 a.m.
