Public Money, Private Risk: The Nuclear Industry’s Hidden Motives

Public Money, Private Risk

The Nuclear Industry’s Hidden Motives

There are countless opinions about nuclear power, and what the best step is for Utah’s journey to properly address the use of this new energy source. The Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) has been a vital tool for local downwinders as they navigate the unpredictable effects of mismanagement on a governmental scale. However, Utah has had a historically bad track record with properly understanding nuclear. Consequently, many residents plea for stricter regulations on the matter, while corporations scramble to throw up Small Modular Reactors left and right. Understanding RECA, the voices of downwinders, and the gravity of current nuclear proposals is critical to making informed decisions that prioritize people and the planet. 

The Problem

In an everchanging state with various energy needs, it makes sense that Utah develops efficient sources to sustain its growth. We have seen nuclear related projects receive tax payers dollars for the last year, including state and federal investments in nuclear research, as well as proposed reactor development. 

 

  • In 2025, the nuclear industry proposed a number of developments in the state, including but not limited to: Brigham City, Milford county, Emory county, San Juan County, and Eagle Mountain.

 

  • On top of the spreading projects, the state also spent over $1.8 on a community engagement campaign to persuade residents about the benefits of nuclear power- claiming it was “the key to energy independence,” despite active concern from communities nearby potential sites.

An Overview

Of course, there is far more than what meets the eye with this new power source regarding the health of our loved ones, and the planet. HEAL is concerned about the rapid construction of Small Nuclear Reactors (SMRs), and limited regulation of such under current legislature. 

 

The main concerns for nuclear energy consist of: waste on site, long term effects of uranium milling, long lasting radiation exposure, and the realities of nuclear fuel reprocessing (costs, wastes, feasibility).

Radiation: The Health Impacts

Radiation impacts everyone. There is no safe level of radiation exposure, however depending on your health, age, gender, and exposure rates, you may be more likely to develop health issues related to radiation exposure such as cancers, birth defects, and other health impacts.

Those who have a preexisting health condition/pregnancy, children, and women, are all more susceptible to the health issues caused by radioactive exposure. This is due to things like… (children have smaller bodies which means a dose of radiation is larger and their cells are dividing and growing which leaves room for cell malformation and cancer development.

There is research that radiation affects reproductive organs more and there are studies that show that intergenerational impacts of radiation exposure can pass from mother to child and even from grandmother, to mother, to grandchild). 

 

Location, or the distance an individual is in relation to radioactive sources affect the intensity of effects, and risks for potential cancers, or conditions. However, there are different forms of radiation and as experienced from the last uranium boom and nuclear weapons testing, soils, waters, plants, and even animals can continue being contaminated for decades.

Impacts on the Environment

Radioactive waste is nearly permanent, and extremely hazardous to any form of life that it comes into contact with. Currently waste from mining, milling, processing, and spent fuel remains on site and leads to a larger radioactive footprint that can impact soil, air, and water.

 

Uranium mining destroys land and habitat while also polluting the nearby water sources. Additionally, the mining and processing of materials releases CO2 into the atmosphere, despite Nuclear being labeled as “clean.”

 

Lastly, a nuclear accident will cause land to be uninhabitable for thousands of years. Clean up of sites is often long, burdensome, and moves the contamination to another site, if clean up happens at all. It is extremely costly and time consuming to clean up sites.

HEAL Utah's Advocacy

HEAL Utah calls for more regulation of nuclear development, and education about the truth of the risks involved with hasty decisions on the matter. Nuclear is something that cannot be overlooked in the name of efficiency and economical gain. It is our responsibility as active citizens to track current and future bills that affect the mitigation of nuclear energy.

Better Alternatives

HEAL Utah urges a shift in how Utah approaches its energy future by prioritizing alternatives that are more affordable, widely available, and far less harmful than risky nuclear development.

This means investing in clean, proven renewable energy sources; strengthening regulatory oversight across the entire nuclear fuel cycle, from uranium mining through waste management; and expanding public education about the health and environmental risks associated with nuclear projects.

If Utah continues to pursue nuclear energy, regulations should be significantly strengthened at every stage — including stricter state oversight beyond federal minimums and careful, independent analysis before advancing new Small Modular Reactor (SMR) proposals. HEAL Utah specifically highlights legislation such as H.B. 78 as a starting point for requiring stronger regulatory authority while ensuring the Nuclear Regulatory Commission retains ultimate safeguards, as well as broader calls to expand protections like the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) for those affected by past contamination. We also support transparency and public participation in state and federal decision-making, increased research before rapid expansion of SMRs, responsible management of existing nuclear waste, and reform of rules so that NRC and state regulations are increased rather than decreased.