Should the U.S. Go Nuclear-Free?

And that’s just for now. New England natural gas generation has jumped from 30% of total electricity in 2011 to 52% in 2012, and nuclear’s exit would undoubtedly imply increasing reliance on an increasingly expensive fuel.

Foolish bottom line
If the United States said no to nuclear, we’d be in a tight spot. Nuclear provides cheap baseload electricity with enviable consistency. But there are advantages to a nuclear-free nation. If supportive policy jumps in to save the day, the generation gap could put the U.S. on a fast track to ramping up alternative energies. Duke Energy Corp (NYSE:DUK)’s recent win for wind energy storage would need a massive influx of R&D to expand beyond a 36 MW battery, and new energy sources like Dominion Resources, Inc. (NYSE:D)‘s  long-term lease for offshore wind would need a timelier timeline than ten years from now.

Our nation would also need to take a hard look at its power system, decentralizing generation via smart investments in smart grid technology. And of course, natural gas would head center stage, paving the way for any utility with capacity to expand generation and transmission operations.

Japan’s nuclear-free for now – and it may stay that way. But the United States isn’t about to follow suit. Market prices play a bigger role than public opinion, and our nation’s energy portfolio will continue to flex to the fuels that provide a present and future balance of consistency and cost.

The article Should the U.S. Go Nuclear-Free? originally appeared on Fool.com and is written by Justin Loiseau.

Fool contributor Justin Loiseau has no position in any stocks mentioned, but he does use electricity. You can follow him on Twitter, @TMFJLo, and on Motley Fool CAPS, @TMFJLo.The Motley Fool recommends Dominion Resources and Exelon.

Copyright © 1995 – 2013 The Motley Fool, LLC. All rights reserved. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.