Nuclear's Perpetual Comeback: A Familiar Tune of Public Risk, Private Gain
THE CLAIM: Resurgent Nuclear Bankability The Hill's opinion piece (2021) asserts that nuclear energy is 'bankable again,' driven by new financial models and small modular reactor (SMR) technology. It suggests a paradigm shift making nuclear an attractive private investment. THE EVIDENCE: Decades of Public Subsidy and Liability Shields Historically, the nuclear industry has been propped up by
significant public funding and liability caps. The Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act of 1957, for instance, set a cap on nuclear accident liability, initially at $560 million per incident. This cap, adjusted over decades, limits the financial exposure of operators and shifts the burden of catastrophic events onto taxpayers. As of 2024, the total liability limit is over $13 billion
but still far below potential costs of a major incident à la Fukushima. Without this legal framework, which effectively insulates private companies from the full financial consequences of an accident, few insurers would cover nuclear power plants, making private investment prohibitive. This is not 'bankability' in a free market sense, but rather a state-engineered financial environment. THE
CONTRADICTIONS: Market Reality vs. Political Will If nuclear energy were truly bankable, it wouldn't require loan guarantees, tax credits, and the explicit limitation of liability that characterizes its history. The Westinghouse Electric Company's bankruptcy in 2017, stemming from cost overruns at Vogtle Electric Generating Plant in Georgia and V.C. Summer Nuclear Generating Station in South