Crist's nuclear bolt sends flutters

Environmentalists warmly embrace global goals -- until nuclear energy passes his lips.

By CRAIG PITTMAN and ASJYLYN LODER
Published July 15, 2007

MIAMI - Six minutes into the speech kicking off his glitzy global warming summit Thursday, Gov. Charlie Crist said the words that made many environmental activists cringe.

Nuclear energy.

In talking about clean alternatives to planet-destroying fossil fuels like coal, Crist mentioned biofuels, solar, wind and then added, almost as an afterthought, "nuclear energy."

Crist has drawn extravagant praise from environmental groups for his wide-ranging efforts to combat climate change announced last week. They repeatedly applauded his speech.

But his embrace of nuclear power has them quietly worried.

"That's a concern," said Mark Ferrulo of Environment Florida. "Nuclear power poses unnecessary safety and environmental risks, is heavily dependent on taxpayer and ratepayer subsidies, and generates deadly radioactive waste."

The environmental groups would much rather Crist play up the other items on his list.

"Do we think this is where this grand opportunity in Florida is leading us -- to more nukes?" asked Jerry Karnas of Environmental Defense, which spent $95,000 to help pay for Crist's global warming summit. "Let's see what can happen with solar, biomass and ethanol first."

Utility executives, who have been feeling the heat from Crist's attacks on their industry's reliance on coal, smile and say the governor's inclusion of nuclear is a wise decision.

Jeff Lyash, CEO of Progress Energy Florida -- which operates the Crystal River nuclear plant and is considering building one in neighboring Levy County -- says the only way to meet Crist's ambitious targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions is to use nuclear power.

Environmental groups' complaints about safety are just wrong, Lyash said.

"Our safety record is unparalleled," he said.

Governor is sold

Crist, too, contends that nuclear power is a safe, nonpolluting alternative to producing power from coal and natural gas. That's why he considers it a viable weapon in the fight against climate change, he said.

Unlike the environmental activists, the governor said he has no worries about the industry's potential for disaster. He pointed out that all the U.S. Navy aircraft carriers built since 1975 are nuclear-powered.

"That's a moving, floating nuke plant," he said.

Nuclear opponents often bring up two accidents that have defined atomic energy's risks: the partial meltdown at Three Mile Island in 1979 and the explosion at Chernobyl in 1986 that killed more than 30 people outright.

"It's been a long time since Three Mile Island," Crist said, pointing out that no similar incident has occurred in the United States since then.

It has also been a long time -- more than a decade -- since a nuclear plant has been built in the United States. The last one opened in Tennessee in 1996, after 22 years of construction. The cost: $7-billion.

For some environmentalists, that's the most effective argument against relying on nuclear power to provide much help in battling global warming.

"Nuclear has advantages in terms of carbon dioxide," said Manley Fuller, president of the Florida Wildlife Federation. "But there's the cost."

Building even one new nuclear plant would cost billions of dollars and likely take years. Ferrulo, of Environmental Florida, said Florida would do better to spend that money and time on energy conservation and renewable sources like solar and wind.

Still, some environmental activists around the country say they are ready to drop their objections to nuclear power because it is cleaner than coal. Last year Greenpeace founder Patrick Moore argued that the environmental movement ought to agree that nuclear power is a viable alternative to fossil fuels, despite safety concerns.

Varying dependence

Crist, in arguing for nuclear power, pointed out that other countries that are battling global warming are not as leery of atomic energy as the United States is. France, for instance, gets three-fourths of its power from 59 nuclear plants.

"All over France, about all you see are nuclear plants," the governor said.

However, some countries concerned about global warming are moving away from nuclear power. In Germany - which signed an agreement with Florida last week to work together on climate change issues - nuclear reactors produce about one-third of electricity. But since 1998 the government has been phasing out its nuclear plants and building up its solar power industry.

On the eve of Crist's summit, the state Energy Commission released a report calling for more nuclear plants in Florida, although not for climate change reasons.

Volatile spikes in the price of natural gas and supply shortages after Hurricane Katrina have state officials concerned about diversifying the fuel for power plants. Therefore, commissioners said, Florida should be willing to consider nuclear power as an alternative.

With Crist doing so many of the things environmental groups have dreamed of for so long, though, most activists remain reluctant to criticize his enthusiasm for atomic energy.

Susan Glickman of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy said she has strong concerns about the problem of nuclear waste disposal.

"I don't want to attack Crist right now on that," she added, "but that's a conversation we're going to have to have with him soon."

[Last modified July 15, 2007, 00:01:16]