Three Mile Island Nearly Killed Nuclear. Now It's Coming Back.
Microsoft has agreed to purchase Three Mile Island's energy to power its AI data centers for the next 20 years. It's the first time a U.S. nuclear reactor will come out of retirement.
HD DownloadIs a nuclear renaissance about to begin on the very site of the public relations catastrophe that practically destroyed the industry 45 years ago?
Constellation Energy recently announced a deal with Microsoft to restore a retired reactor on Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island. Microsoft has agreed to purchase energy from the plant for 20 years to power its AI data centers.
A U.S. nuclear reactor has never before been brought out of retirement.
Nuclear power was once considered the clean energy source of the future, with dozens of new plants coming online in the late '60s and early '70s.
But in March of 1979, a meltdown occurred at Three Mile Island's nuclear plant.
There were no casualties, and there was no lingering environmental damage. But the incident spooked the nation. From a publicity standpoint, the timing was disastrous—Three Mile Island occurred while The China Syndrome, a fictional account of safety cover-ups at a nuclear plant, was still in theaters, featuring Jane Fonda, Jack Lemmon, and Michael Douglas.
"After Three Mile Island, what was considered to be the best interest of the public was just reducing risk to as low as possible," says Adam Stein, director of the Nuclear Energy Innovation Program at the Breakthrough Institute. "It resulted in a huge volume of regulations that anybody that wanted to build a new reactor had to know. It made the learning curve much steeper to even attempt to innovate in the industry."
It was a public relations disaster for the nuclear industry, and the industry's expansion tapered off, concluding in a 20-year spell in which no new nuclear reactors were built in the U.S.
"My view is that these supposedly environmentalist groups formed in the 1970s that are not primarily pro-environment. They're really primarily anti-nuclear," says Eric Dawson, co-founder of Nuclear New York, a group fighting to protect the industry on the grounds that nuclear is "the most scalable, reliable, efficient, land-conserving, material-sparing, zero-emission source of energy ever created."
He says that Three Mile Island empowered the antinuclear movement.
The same year of the meltdown, about 200,000 antinuclear activists crowded into New York's Battery Park City, capping off a week-long concert featuring Pete Seeger, Jackson Browne, and Bonnie Raitt, which raised awareness and funding for the antinuclear movement.
"Stopping atomic energy is practicing patriotism," Ralph Nader told the crowd. "Stopping atomic energy is fighting cancer; stopping atomic energy is fighting inflation."
"They are a generation that was radicalized from the Vietnam War," says Dawson. "They became antiwar. They then became anti nuclear weapons, and then they conflated nuclear weapons with nuclear energy. And they made it their mission to shut down nuclear energy."
And they succeeded in that mission. Environmentalists, in effect, may have crippled the only truly viable form of clean energy.
The federal government makes permitting arduous. Many states severely restrict new plant construction and force operational ones to shut down prematurely.
A striking recent example was the shutdown of Indian Point Energy Center, New York state's largest nuclear plant. Antinuclear activists had targeted the plant. Their cause gained significant traction with the support of New York State Attorney General—and future governor—Andrew Cuomo, who believed the nuclear plant was "risky."
Of course, it is true that nuclear energy carries risk. So does every form of power generation.
"If you look at energy sources, there's nothing that's perfect. There is no utopia. basically we have a choice. Everything is compared to something else," says Dawson.
Decades of political attacks on the nuclear industry have caused the United States to rely more on burning fossil fuels, which brings another set of risks.
"[Nuclear] would eliminate the majority of pollution-related fatalities in the US, which is thousands a year, because most of those come from coal-fired power plants," says Stein.
As politicians have slowly realized that the dangers of nuclear power may have been exaggerated by activists, and the benefits of a reliable emissions-free energy source underappreciated, the regulatory landscape has slowly changed. The first new U.S. reactor built from scratch since 1974 opened in Georgia in 2022—albeit at a very high cost. The federal government issued its first ever approval for a small modular reactor in January 2023.
Constellation estimates that it will spend about $1.6 billion to bring the Three Mile Island reactor online by 2028 and will seek to renew the operating license through 2054. Pennsylvania's governor Josh Shapiro wrote a letter to federal regulators asking that the application be fast-tracked. Microsoft's VP of energy calls the deal "a major milestone" in the company's effort to "decarbonize the grid" while pursuing an AI-driven future that's going to require a lot of energy.
The Microsoft deal is the latest piece of evidence that nuclear energy—after being hampered by decades of hyper-cautious regulation—is poised for a comeback. Three Mile Island could one day become a symbol for nuclear's rebirth.
Photo Credits: RICHARD B. LEVINE/Newscom; FRANCES M. ROBERTS/Newscom; Paul Souders / DanitaDelimont.com / Danita Delimont Photography/Newscom; LAURENCE KESTERSON/KRT/Newscom; Robert J. Polett/Newscom; Dick Darrell/Toronto Star/ZUMA Press/Newscom; St Petersburg Times/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Library of Congress/Bernard Gotfryd; Jmnbqb, CC BY-SA 4.0 DEED, via Wikimedia Commons; Meghan McCarthy/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Erik Mcgregor/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Joe Sohm/Visions of America/Joseph Sohm/Universal Images Group/Newscom; Reginald Mathalone/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Bastiaan Slabbers/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Anthony Behar/Sipa USA/Newscom; */Kyodo/Newscom; Pacific Press/Sipa USA/Newscom; Paul Hennessy/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Michael Siluk/UCG/Universal Images Group/Newscom; KEVIN DIETSCH/UPI/Newscom; Reginald Mathalone/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; ROGER L. WOLLENBERG/UPI/Newscom
Music Credits: "Bubbles Drop" by Cosmonkey via Artlist; "Paper or Plastic" by Bubblz via Artlist; "Digital Abyss" by Stephen Keech via Artlist; "Expand" by Theatre of Delays via Artlist; "Monomer" by Leroy Wild via Artlist; "Behind the City" by Ziv Moran via Artlist; "Fantasma" by Omri Smadar via Artlist
- Video Editor: Danielle Thompson
- Audio Production: Ian Keyser
- Graphics: Adani Samat
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
TMI
Microsoft is evil now?
Microsoft has always been evil. This actually makes them slightly less evil (but only slightly).
Maybe. I want to know if this special deal includes a power feed to the Gates mansion. If Bill has power while the surrounding peasants are burning dung, then I count the deal as evil.
TMI didn't almost kill nuclear. The Soviet funded environmental groups and the media hype did.
I wonder why the Soviets funded environmental groups.
Their steadfast concern for the environment?
Because communists always look after the best interests of their people.
Just ask the 100 million people they murdered from 1917 to 2000.
It was in their best interest to be dead.
Don't forget the Brown family in California, who had business ties to Indonesian oil and gas, and did not want any competition.
Jeff’s ideal nuclear family is fat man with little boy.
Nice.
projecting again
Ok, Pedo Jeffy.
Such a reaction. Don’t have a meltdown.
Or an erection.
I hope they re-read the Windscale report on what can happen when a cold old reactor sits quietly without much thought being given to the slow accumulation of radiation damage and Wigner energy over the decades.
Wouldn’t be a problem if you democrats didn’t squelch all affordable energy production. We would have build a few hundred new reactors over the last forty years.
"I hope they re-read the Windscale report on what can happen when a cold old reactor sits quietly without much thought being given to the slow accumulation of radiation damage and Wigner energy over the decades."
Of course not! They're going to flip the switch and hope everything's all right! /s
Guessing you presume only you have the knowledge to handle the issue.
Democrats are becoming Eloi.
When did you last exercise your imagination of disaster?
Last time one of your posts showed up. But it wasn't imagination.
What is the integral of e to the x?
In Arthur C Clarke's Tales of the White Hart, the reaction to a similar Entelectual was: "Is such ignorance possible?" Graphite (carbon) is chemical fuel that burns in air--the stuff cooling that pile. The Brits accidentally set Windscale alight. The communists at Chernobyl were ordered to shut down the pile with no nuclear engineers present. A gas that eats neutrons soon accumulated. Ordered to restart the thing before the gas dissipated and decayed, the reaction seemed smothered, so they kept pulling control rods to increase power levels. When the gas did dissipate, the cooling water (not air) boiled into a steam explosion and the now dry carbon soon caught fire. Moral: politicians should not operate power plants.
Communist hysteria fanned after TMI killed NOBODY frightened the cowardly nuclear corporations. Reason contributor and boardmember Petr Beckmann spoke up with "The Health Hazards of NOT Going Nuclear." Some people deserve to freeze in the dark. https://libertariantranslator.wordpress.com/2024/01/20/debating-jerry-pournelle/
You’re a communist Hank.
>>Is a nuclear renaissance about to begin on the very site of the public relations catastrophe that practically destroyed the industry 45 years ago?
lolno. some tyrants are taking because tyrants take.
Please forgive my profound ignorance, but is there a safe way to get rid of nuclear waste, and if so, why aren't we building more nuclear reactors?
Watermelons.
Seriously, we need the government to get its head out of its ass (and there's a good chance we can thank Trump if it happens):
"Nuclear Waste Is Piling Up. Here’s How to Fix the Problem"
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/nuclear-waste-is-piling-up-heres-how-to-fix-the-problem/
Thanks.
First we all died from overpopulation. Then we died from the new ice age. Only then did we die from nuclear power.
Of course, since then we have all died from global warming (at least three times), COVID, MAGA white supremacy, botched back alley abortions, and plastic straws. If we have to all die from nukes again, I can deal with it.
I remember TMI quite well, I was in third grade and one of my teachers put a No Nukes sticker on her VW bug. Well, she got what she wanted, but like all progs, moves on to bitch and whine about something else, failing to make the connection that past actions are causing the new problems they complain about.
Well, if you had told me this whole net-zero thing would mean I couldn't store 25,000 selfies in the cloud, I never would have been in favor of saving us from certain doom. Besides, "no nukes" is so '70's.
"As politicians have slowly realized that the dangers of nuclear power may have been exaggerated by activists, and the benefits of a reliable emissions-free energy source underappreciated"
Of course this is NOT what has actually happened. What has actually happened is that politicians have placed their fingers into the wind and detected a change in public opinion. Not only were the risks exaggerated by activists, the risks illustrated by Three Mile Island and Chernobyl had nothing whatever to do with the risks associated with much more modern nuclear reactor technology at the time. Both "meltdowns" were in very old graphite core water cooled reactors during extremely dangerous operator activities and could not have happened except for those activities.
Nuclear power is the Greenies version of Armageddon. There is this superstitious fear based, not it science or fact, but based in hysteria, slogans, and a desire to follow the narrative. The Union of Concerned Scientists has a list of nuclear accidents in world history. It's actually a pretty tame list.
https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/brief-history-nuclear-accidents-worldwide
60 Minutes and Pravda nearly killed American nuclear generating capacity. TMI killed nothing and nobody. 60 Minutes also screeched identical hysteria to push the coercive DEA agenda, including invading other countries to spray poison, bribe, kidnap and kill politicians right before the 1987 Stock Market Crash. Remember?