Nuclear Power

Question A: Encouraging development of new nuclear power generation facilities will lead to lower energy prices in Ohio.

Question B: Encouraging development of new nuclear power generation facilities will substantially increase health risks for Ohio residents.

Question C: Encouraging development of new nuclear power generation facilities will generate economic benefits that outweigh their economic costs.

Question A: Encouraging development of new nuclear power generation facilities will lead to lower energy prices in Ohio.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Uncertain	3	It depends on how nuclear power is encouraged. By the laws of supply and demand, more power supply would normally mean lower prices, and yet if supply is encouraged by guaranteeing them high prices (as has happened in America), then it obviously wouldn't work.
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Uncertain	10	Larger supply could lead to lower prices, but the large fixed costs of a new source of energy would have to be passed on to customers, too
Ron Cheung	Oberlin College	Agree	5
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Agree	8
Vinnie Gajjala	Tiffin Univeristy	Agree	8
Will Georgic	Ohio Wesleyan University	Strongly Agree	10	Perhaps not immediately, but over the long run increased supply should put downward pressure on prices
Bob Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Agree	6	Probably will but not immediately. They take a long time to get online.
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Uncertain	7
Faria Huq	Lake Erie College	Uncertain	5	Basic laws of demand and supply would suggest that in the face of increasing demand, supply needs to be increased in order to keep prices low. However, given the very large fixed costs associated with developing nuclear power generation facilities, there would need to be reliable projections of the specific energy needs of the data centers prior to investing in them. There should also be some form of commitment by the data centers to use the additional energy produced.
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Strongly Agree	9
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Agree	9
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Agree	8
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Uncertain	8
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Agree	5
Iryna Topolyan	University of Cincinnati	Agree	8
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Agree	6
Rachel Wilson	College Board	Strongly Agree	8	Nuclear power requires massive upfront capital and a long development horizon, making it politically challenging. However, its near-zero marginal cost of production offers significant long-term price stability.

Question B: Encouraging development of new nuclear power generation facilities will substantially increase health risks for Ohio residents.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Strongly Disagree	8	Nuclear power has a long track record and Western plant designs have produced much, much lower rates of health problems for area residents than coal-fired plants which have killed hundreds of thousands of Americans due to pollution. Even the worst nuclear disasters in the West, Three-Mile Island and Fukushima, killed very few people directly although there were many indirect deaths caused by the evacuations. Those are the worst disasters in the entire global history of capitalist nuclear reactors, and the technology has been improving.
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Disagree	8	Nuclear energy has proven to be very safe; the biggest risk would be from terrorist attack, but there are sexier targets to attack than Ohio
Ron Cheung	Oberlin College	Disagree	5
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Uncertain	5
Vinnie Gajjala	Tiffin Univeristy	Uncertain	8
Will Georgic	Ohio Wesleyan University	Strongly Disagree	8	The expected health effect is minimal, but you can't completely discount the risk of a catastrophic event
Bob Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Disagree	8	It probably won't have much of an effect but this is a topic not in my wheelhouse.
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Disagree	7
Faria Huq	Lake Erie College	Uncertain	4
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Disagree	5
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Strongly Disagree	9
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Disagree	8
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Agree	6
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Disagree	4
Iryna Topolyan	University of Cincinnati	Strongly Agree	10
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Uncertain	6
Rachel Wilson	College Board	Strongly Disagree	6

Question C: Encouraging development of new nuclear power generation facilities will generate economic benefits that outweigh their economic costs.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Agree	3	The average life of nuclear power plants has been well over a half century and investing in this kind of long-running technology is inherently speculative. If renewables and batteries and other substitutes keep getting cheaper at the same speed as they have been, that could drive down electricity prices below what is needed to recoup the huge fixed costs of nuclear power. But if AI servers keep increasing demand, then nuclear investment could be extremely profitable. I personally think it is worth the risk, given that nuclear power has lower externalities than fossil fuels, but I'm just speculating that growing demand will keep electricity prices high enough to make nuclear economically viable despite competing new technologies that are already on the horizon.
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Agree	8	Clean source of energy that is not weather dependent with efficient modern reactors
Ron Cheung	Oberlin College	Agree	7
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Uncertain	5
Vinnie Gajjala	Tiffin Univeristy	Uncertain	8
Will Georgic	Ohio Wesleyan University	Strongly Agree	10
Bob Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Agree	8	We will need more electricity generation. There are political limits to wind and solar power and natural gas and coal have their own issues.
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Agree	7
Faria Huq	Lake Erie College	Uncertain	5
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Agree	6
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Agree	9
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Agree	7
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Uncertain	8
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Uncertain	5
Iryna Topolyan	University of Cincinnati	Uncertain	5	The demand for electricity is projected to increase substantially year after year. It is imperative to find ways to increase supply with low climate impact. Nuclear energy looks like a good candidate. My reservation is that, within the long time frame it takes to build and bring online a new nuclear plant, fusion may become a viable (and much more attractive) option.
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Agree	8
Rachel Wilson	College Board	Strongly Agree	8	With data centers devouring electricity and driving up prices, we’re staring down a real risk of an energy-driven slowdown. Nuclear might be the unglamorous but necessary insurance policy.