Reference no: EM132171486

Nuclear power offered the hope of being “too cheap to meter,” and with emissions not a concern, the push for new nuclear power plants was on the rise at the turn of the millennium. For the first time in decades, companies were submitting applications for new licenses. New construction started at two major sites, V.C. Sumner Units 2 & 3 in South Carolina and Vogtle Units 3 & 4 in Georgia. Additionally, Watts Bar Unit 2 in Tennessee resumed construction after decades of stagnation. While work at these locations continues, new regulatory requirements following the Fukushima Daiichi event combined with low gas prices have threatened nuclear power’s viability. As such, several power plants have decided to “pull the plug” and shut down. At the same time, hydropower construction is being hailed across the world as a step in the right direction. But at what cost? While hydropower is effectively emissions free, it is sometimes seen as unacceptably intrusive to the surrounding environment.Your organization has asked you to attend an energy conference in Washington D.C. There will be a number of U.S. Senators and Congressmen present and you realize that you will have an opportunity to influence energy policy. As such, you have reviewed several reputable sources and have gathered a number of key facts that support your organization’s position on both hydropower and nuclear generation. Please represent your view from the position as an environmental activist.