-
Regulatory Malpractice (2003)
The Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 created the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). This act of Congress gave the NRC the important, and exclusive, task of protecting the public from the radiological consequences of nuclear power. -
Research Reactors Fueled by Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) (2004)
HEU is attractive to terrorist groups because it can be used directly to make a simple nuclear weapon. Many countries possess small nuclear "research" reactors that are used for professional training, scientific research, and medical radioisotope production. More than 100 operating research reactors worldwide are fueled with HEU -
Impacts of a Terrorist Attack at Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant (2004)
Since 9/11, the specter of a terrorist attack at the Indian Point nuclear power plant, thirty-five miles upwind from midtown Manhattan, has caused great concern for residents of the New York metropolitan area. -
Nuclear Power in a Warming World (2007)
The life cycle of nuclear power results in relatively little global warming pollution, but building a new fleet of plants could increase threats to public safety and national security. Nuclear power is riskier than it should—and could—be. The United States has strong safety regulations on the books, but the Nuclear Regulatory Commission does not enforce them consistently. -
Futility at the Utility: Two Decades of Missed Opportunities at Fermi Unit 2 (2007)
For over two decades, workers at Detroit Edison's Fermi Unit 2 nuclear power reactor dutifully tested a key safety system—the one that reacts to interruptions in electricity and signals the onsite emergency diesel generators to start and power components that protect the reactor core from damage -
Walking a Nuclear Tightrope (2006)
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) seems to be following the script of the movie Groundhog Day, reliving the same bad event again and again. This event—an outage at a nuclear power plant that lasts more than a year—has happened 51 times at 41 different reactors around the United States and shows no signs of stopping. -
Fire When Not Ready (2009)
By law, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is the sole governmental agency responsible for protecting Americans from the risks posed by fire hazards at nuclear power plats. By chronic malpractice, the NRC is the sole governmental agency exposing Americans to unnecessarily high risks from fire hazards at nuclear power plans. -
Nuclear Loan Guarantees (2009)
Originally conceived as providing power that would be “too cheap to meter,” nuclear energy was seen as the future of the electric industry. Reality quickly overtook this utopian vision in what has been called “the largest managerial disaster in business history,” leading to two bailouts of the industry in the 1980s and 1990s. -
Nuclear Power: A Resurgence We Can't Afford (2009)
Nuclear power could play a role in reducing global warming emissions because reactors emit almost no carbon while they operate and can have low life-cycle emissions. Partly for that reason, advocates are calling for a nationwide investment in at least 100 new nuclear reactors, backed by greatly expanded federal loan guarantees. However, the industry must resolve major economic, safety, security, and waste disposal challenges before new nuclear reactors could make a significant contribution to re -
Nuclear Power Subsidies Will Shift Financial Risks to Taxpayers (2010)
Massive new subsidies will only further mask nuclear power’s considerable costs and risks while disadvantaging more cost-effective and less risky carbon reduction measures that can be implemented much more quickly, such as energy efficiency and many renewable energy technologies. -
Control rods at Peach Bottom (2010)
In January 2010, workers reduced the power level of the Unit 2 reactor at the Peach Bottom nuclear plant in Pennsylvania to time how long it took control rods to fully insert into the reactor core. Safety studies assume the control rods will insert within a short time period to stop the nuclear chain reaction to mitigate the consequences of an accident. The tests revealed that three of the 19 control rods tested took longer than assumed. -
Regulatory Roulette: The NRC's Inconsistent Oversight of Radioactive Releases from Nuclear Power Plants (2010)
Protecting People and the Environment is the tagline used by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). This report shows that the NRC is not living up to its self-stated mission when it comes to accidental releases of radioactive liquids and gases from nuclear power plants. -
The NRC's Reactor Oversight Process: An Assessment of the First Decade (2011)
The Reactor Oversight Process (ROP), which the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) instituted to evaluate the safety and security performance of the nation’s 104 nuclear power reactors, recently passed the ten year mark. This issue brief documents UCS’s review of the ROP’s first decade. -
Nuclear Power: Still Not Viable without Subsidies (2011)
Government subsidies to the nuclear power industry over the past fifty years have been so large in proportion to the value of the energy produced that in some cases it would have cost taxpayers less to simply buy kilowatts on the open market and give them away, according to a February 2011 report by the Union of Concerned Scientists. -
The NRC and Nuclear Power Plant Safety in 2010
The crisis at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant in Japan following the March 11 earthquake and tsunami is a stark reminder of the risks inherent in nuclear power. One of its consequences has been heightened concern about the safety of nuclear power facilities in the United States. -
U.S. Nuclear Power After Fukushima (2011)
The recent events in Japan remind us that while the likelihood of a nuclear power plant accident is low, its potential consequences are grave. And an accident like Fukushima could happen here. An equipment malfunction, fire, human error, natural disaster or terrorist attack could—separately or in combination—lead to a nuclear crisis. -
Florida and Georgia Nuclear Power Projects Too Risky, Costly (2011)
Florida and Georgia residents should be asking "what's in it for us?" when it comes to proposed construction of new or expanded nuclear power plants in their states. According to a new study, they probably won't be happy with the answer—because what's in it for them is primarily higher costs and greater risks. And in both states, safer, more cost-efficient energy choices are available. -
Emergency Planning for Nuclear Disasters (2011)
One hundred and twenty million Americans live within 50 miles of a nuclear power plant. Fortunately, a serious accident at one of these plants is highly unlikely. But as we saw at Fukushima, sometimes the unlikely is what happens, and we must be prepared to respond when it does. -
The NRC and Nuclear Power Plant Safety
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the federal agency responsible for ensuring that U.S. nuclear plants are operated as safely as possible, gets mixed reviews again in our second annual assessment of NRC response to safety problems, The NRC and Nuclear Power Plant Safety in 2011: Living on Borrowed Time. -
U.S. Nuclear Power Safety One Year After Fukushima (2012)
On March 11, 2011, disaster struck Japan in the form of a monster earthquake and tsunami. In their wake came news of a third calamity: a "station blackout" at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant had disabled the plant's emergency cooling systems. -
The NRC and Nuclear Power Plant Safety (2012)
When a safety net breaks, you don't simply treat the injuries suffered by the unlucky performers. You fix the net. This analogy serves as the starting point for The NRC and Nuclear Power Plant Safety in 2012: Tolerating the Intolerable, our third annual review of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's performance in policing the U.S. nuclear power industry. -
Diablo Canyon and Earthquake Risk (2013)
California's Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant sits near several earthquake fault lines. One of these—discovered in late 2008—is a mere 2,000 feet from Diablo Canyon's two reactors, and could cause more ground motion during an earthquake than the reactors were designed to withstand. -
Small Modular Reactors: Safety, Security and Cost Concerns (2013)
According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and some members of the nuclear industry, the next big thing in nuclear energy will be a small thing: the “small modular reactor” (SMR). SMRs—“small” because they generate a maximum of about 30 percent as much power as typical current reactors, and “modular” because they can be assembled in factories and shipped to power plant sites—have been getting a lot of positive attention recently, as the nuclear power industry has struggled to remain econo -
Fukushima: The Story of a Nuclear Disaster (2014)
Fukushima was one of the worst nuclear disasters of all time—and it’s not over
Years of poor regulation and inadequate safety controls left the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant dangerously unprepared when an earthquake and resulting tsunami hit in March 2011. Fukushima’s aftermath includes hundreds of square miles of uninhabitable land, tens of thousands of relocated people, and billions of dollars of economic loss—ranking it alongside Chernobyl as one of the world’s worst nuclear disaster -
The NRC and Nuclear Power Plant Safety in 2013: More Jekyll, Less Hyde
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is meant to protect public safety by enforcing regulations at U.S. nuclear power plants. Every year since 2010, we've analyzed the NRC’s performance, including what went well and what needs improving. 2013 was a mixed year for the NRC. Several incidents showed the NRC can be an effective regulator, but inconsistent enforcement and several near-misses means there’s more to be done. Safety regulations are enforced inconsistently
The NRC has, at times, prov -
The NRC and Nuclear Power Plant Safety in 2013: More Jekyll, Less Hyde
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is meant to protect public safety by enforcing regulations at U.S. nuclear power plants. Every year since 2010, we've analyzed the NRC’s performance, including what went well and what needs improving. 2013 was a mixed year for the NRC. Several incidents showed the NRC can be an effective regulator, but inconsistent enforcement and several near-misses means there’s more to be done. Safety regulations are enforced inconsistently
The NRC has, at times, prov