The nuclear power plant on Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island, which is scheduled to close on Sept. 30, 2019. Photo: Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP/Getty Images

Due to atrophy at home and competition abroad, the U.S. nuclear industry is increasingly at risk of losing power plants, workforce talent and global business.

Why it matters: The civilian and military nuclear sectors depend on one another, and both are strategic assets vital to national security. Nuclear energy also eases the path to decarbonizing the U.S. electric grid.

Context: Prospective employment in the civilian nuclear power sector is a core incentive to academic training and military careers in nuclear energy. This supply chain of expertise is at least as essential as the material inputs.

Where it stands: The U.S. has lost 6 nuclear energy plants since 2013, while 9 more are planned to close in the next decade.

  • Nuclear power faces stiff competition from cheaper fuels like natural gas, solar and wind, while its reliability, resilience and zero-carbon footprint go undervalued.
  • Meanwhile, foreign state-owned nuclear companies can outcompete U.S. firms. Russia and China are building more than 60% of the world’s new nuclear plants, with significant state support.

What’s happening: Some states are incorporating nuclear energy into their clean energy portfolio standards to prevent plant closures. Congress recently passed 2 bills to encourage advanced nuclear technologies and a third was introduced in March.

Yes, but: Stronger legislation could help the industry by incentivizing more innovation and easing the permitting processes.

  • A carbon fee of $15 per ton that increases 5% a year (in real-dollar terms) could support the current fleet and even encourage new plant construction by 2050, according to the Energy Information Agency. A $25 baseline would yield even greater benefits.
  • Small modular reactors and “generation IV” technologies promise to reduce waste, shorten construction times and decrease proliferation and safety risks. These innovations could lower costs but would likely require government investment.

The bottom line: If more of America’s nuclear power plants shutter over the coming decade, the U.S. could see further erosion of both its international influence and the industrial-scientific base critical to future innovation.

The authors are with the Atlantic Council’s Global Energy Center, where Randolph Bell is director, Jennifer T. Gordon is deputy director and Robert F. Ichord Jr. is a senior fellow.

Go deeper: Read the Atlantic Council report on the U.S. nuclear industry's strategic challenges.

Go deeper

Miriam Kramer, author of Space
9 mins ago - Science

The next environmental crisis could be in space

Illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios

An unexpected frontier is facing calls for new environmental regulations and cleanup: outer space.

Why it matters: Space junk clutters up orbits and poses an urgent threat to weather, security, communications and other satellites. Long-term, you can’t live or work in space if trash is literally slamming into you.

38 mins ago - Health

Axios-Ipsos poll: Trump's sickness makes him harder to trust

Data: Axios/Ipsos poll; Note: ±3.3% margin of error; Chart: Axios Visuals

Large shares of women, seniors and independents now say they're less likely to trust President Trump for accurate information about COVID-19 since he caught it himself, according to the latest installment of the Axios/Ipsos Coronavirus Index.

The big picture: Week 28 of our national survey has most Americans rejecting ideas that Trump has floated around hydroxychloriquine as a virus treatment, how herd immunity works or any imminent availability of a vaccine.

NY Post story goes massive on social media despite crackdowns

Data: NewsWhip; Chart: Naema Ahmed/Axios

Facebook and Twitter's frantic attempts to stop the spread of the New York Post's Hunter Biden story didn't prevent the article from becoming the top story about the election on those platforms last week, according to data from NewsWhip.

Why it matters: The data shows that even swift, aggressive content suppression may not be swift or aggressive enough to keep down a story with as much White House backing and partisan fuel as this one.