Economists Testify On Energy Value Of Nuclear Power

Two Harvard professor testified yesterday before a Connecticut regulatory commission that they see nuclear power as the best solution to the energy problem.

Alan S. Manne, professor of Political Economy at the Kennedy School of Government, said yesterday before the Public Utilities Control Authority (PUCA) in Hartford that a nuclear moratorium would cost an extra $300 billion in the next forty years in a conservation-oriented economy using fossil energy.

Irvin C. Bupp, lecturer on Business Administration at the Business School, said at the hearing that "Connecticut's best energy bet for the future is nuclear power, but politics and problems with financing could change that," according to a report by the Associated Press.

PUCA is conducting the hearing to determine if nuclear power plants are economically realistic in the future in view of rising prices for uranium, high construction expenses, and environmental risks.

Bupp, the lead-off witness, termed nuclear power "the most important attempt to modernize society since the railroad," but he stressed that it depends on several unproven assumptions.

The assumptions are that nuclear power is cheaper and involves fewer national security problems than fossil fuels and that atomic power poses fewer environmental hazards than do fossil fuels, Bupp said.

Manne said that the $300 billion "is not worth paying" and that "it would make better sense to allocate a fraction of this amount to further improvements in nuclear safety," and advocated a minimum-cost combination of energy conservation, fossil fuel power production, and some nuclear energy.

'No Economic Advantage'

Daniel F. Ford '70, a director of the Union of Concerned Scientists, a group opposed to nuclear reactors, said yesterday that "there is no economic advantage to nuclear power plants."

Ford termed Manne's $300 billion dollar figure as "unbelievable" and pointed out that "nuclear power plants cost 50 per cent more to build than coal power plants," and that "power companies have been lobbying for federal assistance to build nuclear plants."

Thomas R. Stauffer, lecturer on Economics who is scheduled to testify before PUCA next week, said yesterday that Bupp is not qualified to make statements about the state of the art in physics and engineering on nuclear power plants.

Burning Bushes Next?

Stauffer said that most of the problems of nuclear reactors--radioactive waste and leakage--have been solved and that the only other alternative is coal. He ruled out the exotic fuels, such as solar energy, tidal energy, and "burning water hyacinths," as being insignificant.