Illinois must protect its nuclear energy
President Obama's pursuit of climate change regulations, set to be finalized this summer, could make him the most progressive environmentalist to serve as president since Teddy Roosevelt established the Grand Canyon and protected more than 100 million acres of national forests.
Achieving Obama's climate change goals depends on preservation of one essential source of electricity: nuclear energy. Illinois, where nuclear energy generates almost 50 percent of the electricity, leads the nation in the production of power from nuclear energy facilities and is a case study in the importance of this emission-free energy source.
Similar to his leadership on fuel efficiency and green energy, the president understands any new plan to reduce power plant carbon emissions must take into account jobs and the economy. Illinois nuclear energy facilities have long provided the state with well-paying jobs and clean electricity.
Illinois' 11 reactors are economic engines for the state, injecting nearly $9 billion per year into the state economy and generating 28,000 direct and indirect jobs. Jobs in the nuclear energy industry pay 36 percent more than average salaries in the local area. Annually, the nuclear energy industry purchases more than $1.2 billion of materials, services and fuel from more than 6,500 companies in Illinois.
Unfortunately these economic benefits are at risk. Some Illinois facilities could close despite the potential for yet greater environmentally responsible electricity over the decades to come. We need to think long and hard before closing these facilities. Once a nuclear energy facility is closed, it's unlikely that it will restart in the future.
A report issued in January by the state of Illinois concluded that there would be substantial negative economic impacts if these plants were to close. The report found that the early closure of these plants would cause $1.8 billion per year in lost economic activity in Illinois and nearly 8,000 lost jobs.
The domino effect of closing the plants would also jeopardize the $290 million in tax revenue used to fund schools, parks, fire departments, police and other public services. At the same time, the costs associated with increased carbon emissions could be as much as $18 billion per year.
According to The Economist, when taking into account the real cost of all energy sources, "the most cost-effective zero-emission technology is nuclear power." Nuclear energy is an essential part of America's clean energy portfolio, providing nearly two-thirds of our emission-free electricity. In Illinois alone, nuclear energy churns out 90 percent of Illinois' clean energy - enough to meet the needs of 7 million Illinois residents.
Today, only 3.6 percent of the state's electricity is generated from renewable sources of energy. Nuclear energy is the bulk of all the emissions-free electricity in Illinois, without nuclear energy Illinois will fall short of meeting the proposed EPA clean air goals.
Ambassador Ron Kirk is co-chair of the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition. He previously served as U.S. trade representative and mayor of Dallas.