as nuclear power loses ground to natural gas, environmentalists are torn: are the risks worth saving it for climate’s sake?pa gasoline prices creep toward $3 per gallon ahead of summer travel season - energy storage system price

The gas boom should help the power sector reduce its carbon footprint by replacing the old carbon dioxide.
Spewing with newer, lower coal plants
Factories that emit natural gas.
This has already happened to some extent.
With the exit of coal-fired power plants, carbon emissions in the power sector have decreased.
But the influx of cheap gas also threatens America's biggest source of carbon emissions.
Free Electricity: nuclear power.
In Pennsylvania and Ohio, four nuclear power plants said they would shut down a few years before their scheduled retirement date unless they received state assistance.
Among them are Three Mile Island near Harrisburg and Beaver Valley in the port of pasping.
And Davis-
At Besse and Perry factories in Ohio.
If these factories are closed, this is bad news for climate hawks.
"If you are concerned about climate change and you think it is an urgent or even existential threat to human society, then you should be very concerned about the shutdown of nuclear power plants, Dr. Jesse Jenkins said. D.
Candidate for the research grid at MIT.
This is because currently by soon-to-
The shut-down nuclear power plant is likely to be replaced by natural gas, which generates about half of the carbon dioxide produced by coal.
If the plant is shut down, emissions could increase, and the four plants provide enough power to 4 million households.
A recent industry
The funded group found that these plants provide more power than all wind and solar energy in the PJM Internet, which is the grid that serves 65 million people. Atlantic region.
The report estimates that replacing these four plants will produce the same amount of carbon pollution as the four.
5 million more cars on the road.
"Each of these nuclear power plants is an important source of low carbon and emissions --
Free power, losing every power is an important step in our rapid development towards a zero carbon energy system, "Jenkins said.
To continue operating, owners of nuclear power plants are seeking help from the states and the federal government.
First energy has asked the federal government to announce a power grid emergency to keep its coal and nuclear power plants running.
But in the electricity market where cheap natural gas is flooded, it can be difficult to keep these plants online.
Jenkins's study found that low gas prices are the main reason why the nuclear industry is in trouble.
New York and Illinois are subsidizing struggling nuclear power plants through zero-emission credit --
The subsidy paid to the factory according to the amount of carbon pollution saved by the factory.
Matt Wald, spokesman for the Institute for Nuclear Energy of the industrial trade organization, said subsidies were necessary.
"We are looking to make the market aware of what we provide for the system," said Wald . ".
"It's not doing this now.
"Environmental groups have clashed in the event of nuclear instability, which has troubled environmental groups that have long opposed nuclear energy.
"If they are replaced by factories that burn fracking gas, then it is definitely a problem," said Tom Schuster, a senior campaign representative at Penn Sierra Club . ".
But, Schuster says there are environmental problems in the nuclear energy itself: the effects of radioactive waste, uranium mining, and the risks of the Fukushima accident. like disaster.
In addition, he said that funds for the opening of nuclear power plants could be used for the construction of the renewable energy sector.
"If the policy to rescue nuclear power plants is structured so much that we spend a lot of money keeping them online, otherwise we might be spending on really clean energy, then there's a problem.
But nuclear power is still China's biggest source of carbon emissions.
Free electricity.
So, Schuster says the Sierra Club supports the Illinois nuclear rescue program, which also promotes renewable energy.
"I think this is looking at the nuclear power plant policy as a phase-out, not a bailout," Schuster said . ".
In New Jersey, the state will spend $0. 3 billion a year to maintain the online operation of three nuclear power plants, while also raising the renewable energy target to 50% in 2030. Separate Actions were taken to improve solar energy and energy storage.
The country is leading the way in nuclear energy, says the best way to reduce carbon emissions is to tax them.
This will make coal and natural gas more expensive, he said, which will increase the use of renewable energy and nuclear energy.
But the federal government is unlikely to tax carbon emissions.
As a result, most of the activities to keep nuclear power plants online are carried out in the United States.
Any operation to rescue the plant in Pennsylvania will face strong opposition.
The big gas industry in Pennsylvania opposes such ideas.
Stephanie Katarino Wiseman, executive director of Pennsylvania-related oil industry, said in an email that her organization "opposes any effort to subsidize one energy rather than another, because when the government picks winners and losers in the electricity market, consumers
The state legislature has a double.
The party Nuclear Caucus is looking for policy solutions to keep the nuclear power plant running.
But so far, the caucus has not put forward any bills in the Legislature to keep the state's nuclear power plants running.
Correction: As reported in the previous version of the story, the Sierra Club supports a bailout in Illinois, but not in other states.