nuclear-news

Oregon hasn’t said never to nuclear power, but it should

BY LLOYD K. MARBET, Sep 10, 2023  https://www.bendbulletin.com/opinion/guest-column-oregon-hasnt-said-never-to-nuclear-power-but-it-should/article_5f0b13ec-4e93-11ee-873b-6fbd0628540c.html

Recently, editorials have appeared across Oregon in a number of newspapers. They are remarkably similar, and subtly deceptive in their content, as if the Nuclear Pied Piper is once again in town, playing new music for a great revival if only you will follow the Pied Piper down its unforseen road once again.

Have we resolved the problems of the nuclear fuel cycle? NO! A complicated cycle consisting of: — availability of uranium, mining, milling, enrichment, and fuel fabrication — construction of nuclear power plants with its delays and tremendous cost overruns — uncertain safety of nuclear plant operations with government limited liability leaving taxpayers holding the bag — targets of war, terrorism and natural disasters — radiation releases difficult to detect, and health effects difficult to prove, with ongoing disputes over the number of deaths — radioactive wastes throughout the fuel cycle demanding permanent disposal, up to thousands of years for high level radioactive waste — and decommissioning of an elaborate contaminated nuclear infrastructure. The problems of the nuclear fuel cycle are not resolved, nor fully accounted for!

Nuclear energy is not “zero emissions.” Oregon law measures carbon emissions at only one point in its fuel cycle: at the generation of electricity. The nuclear fuel cycle is an ongoing tragedy visiting its impacts on generations to come. Commercial “Small Modular Nuclear Reactors” are unproven designs on paper. If we are going to save ourselves from Climate Annihilation the time for honest accountability has come. Read Mark Jacobson’s book “No Miracles Needed: How Today’s Technology Can Save Our Climate and Clean Our Air.”

Oregon’s ballot measure and legislative referral process is a valuable educational tool for enlightening the electorate on important issues. It is also the reason why I strongly support preserving the ballot measure law passed by Oregon voters in 1980 and not repealing this hard-fought effort, that has protected Oregonians for 43 years by requiring the commercial nuclear power industry to have a “terminal” repository for its high level radioactive waste before producing any more. This law doesn’t say never to nuclear power.

Secondly, and most important, it provides, by referral to all Oregon voters, the right to make the final decision on whether proposed commercial nuclear power plants are needed, cost effective, and can safely operate in our state! The Bulletin’s editorial provides an incorrect history of the 1980 and 1986 ballot measures. The 1986 ballot measure on nuclear power was not passed into law!

Why are nuclear proponents seeking another vote on the 1980 law? Especially when repealing what gives Oregonians an ongoing vote on whether the nuclear industry has successfully met its obligation to provide a viable cost effective energy resource, capable of terminally disposing its high level nuclear wastes.

In the last Oregon legislative session, a hearing was held on one of the two identical bills that sought to re-refer the 1980, not the failed 1986, ballot measure to another vote. Both 2023 bills “fizzled out” after a House Committee heard testimony in favor of them and overwhelming testimony in opposition! Especially of note is testimony provided by Dirk Dunning, formerly of the Oregon Department of Energy, and Tami Thatcher, formerly of the Idaho National Laboratory. All testimony is available to read online at: tinyurl.com/Testimonyonnukes.

September 11, 2023 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Nuclear energy touted at West Virginia Chamber forum, but key cost, oversight and waste management questions linger

The Herald Dispatch, By Mike Tony 4 Sept 23

West Virginia political and business leaders made clear during last week’s state Chamber of Commerce annual summit they see a significant role for nuclear power in the state’s energy future.

“It’s a promise for our state,” Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., said of nuclear energy during a summit speech at The Greenbrier resort in White Sulphur Springs Wednesday.

But recent federal reports have observed key cost, waste management and federal oversight questions linger over unconventional — or “advanced” — nuclear technologies that supporters say would be safer and cheaper than existing nuclear reactors.

……………………………………….. Emil Avram, vice president of business development at Virginia-based Dominion Energy,  estimated the nuclear facility Dominion is exploring would require an investment of $3 billion to $5 billion per 300- to 400-megawatt facility — and that the company is planning to build up to 18 of those units over the next 25 years.

“So we also have to find sustainable, I’ll call it balance-sheet solutions for our company as we build out this capital-intensive infrastructure,” Avram said.

……………………………………Small modular reactor technology is not yet market-ready. The Department of Energy has approved cost-share awards to develop small modular reactors that can be operational by the end of the decade.

A Congressional Research Service overview of advanced nuclear reactors published in February noted research on small modular reactors suggesting their small size will keep them from achieving economies of scale.

The overview noted a 2018 study by researchers from Carnegie Mellon and Harvard universities and the University of California, San Diego predicting the cost per unit of power of a small modular reactor would very likely be higher than that of a large reactor, even if the smaller reactors may be cheaper to build.

The unit cost of producing electricity from nuclear energy was slightly more than coal and over double that of solar, geothermal, onshore wind or natural gas in the federal Energy Information Administration’s annually published energy outlook for 2022.

In its overview, the Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan policy analysis agency within the Library of Congress, quoted a 2023 conclusion from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine that there’s a “learning curve for both small modular reactor construction costs and deployment [that] needs to be understood……………………………………………………

The West Virginia Legislature lifted restrictions on nuclear power plant construction early in the 2022 regular legislative session.

The Senate on July 27 included the Capito and Carper-led nuclear measure, the Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for Clean Energy (ADVANCE) Act, in the National Defense Authorization Act that passed through the chamber. The National Defense Authorization Act would approve fiscal year 2024 appropriations and establish policies for Department of Defense programs…………………………………………..

A recent federal government watchdog report found the agency charged with protecting public safety and health regarding nuclear energy has important work to do to prepare for an expected influx of advanced nuclear reactor applications.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has staffing and licensing review issues that could hinder the agency’s oversight and developers’ ability to deploy advanced nuclear reactors, the Government Accountability Office found in its report released in July.

The office found commission officials and most stakeholders it interviewed indicated the commission faces challenges in hiring and retaining staff needed to review advanced reactors.

Existing commission guidance does not clearly advise agency staff on how to establish and manage licensing review schedules for incomplete applications, the Government Accountability Office found.

Without such guidance, the commission’s reviews of advanced reactor applications may not be clear and predictable, the office warned.

Capito and Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., the top Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, had asked the office last year to assess the commission’s preparedness to review and approve advanced nuclear reactor applications.

the Congressional Research Service noted some advanced reactor technologies have chemical properties that pose safety concerns, including reactivity, toxicity, or corrosiveness of the primary coolant in the case of sodium, lead and molten salts, respectively.

It’s unclear whether future advanced nuclear reactor technologies would improve on past handling of reprocessing wastes, the Congressional Research Service report observed. The service cited a National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report published this year finding that amounts and types of waste that will be generated by advanced reactors are difficult to estimate “at this early stage” of development.  https://www.herald-dispatch.com/news/nuclear-energy-touted-at-wv-chamber-forum-but-key-cost-oversight-and-waste-management-questions/article_7941cf2a-19dc-57e7-a44d-30a7672728da.html

September 6, 2023 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | 1 Comment

Illinois legislators have a lot to learn about nuclear power

Lawmakers in Springfield who are not willing to put much effort into learning fundamental details have no business writing future energy legislation, writes David A. Kraft, director of the Nuclear Energy Information Service.

David A. Kraft, director, Nuclear Energy Information Service, Sept 4, 2023,  https://chicago.suntimes.com/2023/9/4/23855690/illinois-legislators-moratorium-nuclear-energy-info-service-small-modular-reactors-pritzker-letters

Rich Miller’s Aug. 25 column about Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s veto of the attempt to repeal the Illinois nuclear construction moratorium provides a valuable picture of the politics behind nuclear legislation (“Pritzker sends mixed messages on moratorium of new Illinois nuclear plants”).

It also demonstrates how important it is for legislators to actually know something about what they’re advocating or voting for. It has been clear throughout all the hearings that Illinois legislators lack the depth of knowledge about proposed nuclear reactors needed before financially binding ratepayers and the Illinois economy to a pro-nuclear future.

Nuclear proponents — particularly sponsoring Sen. Sue Rezin — “hotly dispute,” as Miller wrote, Pritzker’s concerns that drafting (SB 76) that way would “open the door to large-scale nuclear power plants.” The 11th-hour language change advocating “advanced reactors” drove his concern.

However, the governor is 100% correct and nuclear advocates 100% wrong.

A 2023 report by the Congressional Research Service clearly states, “Advanced reactor designs come in a wide range of sizes, from less than 15 MWe to 1,500 MWe or more.” The latter is 400 MWe larger than an Illinois Braidwood reactor.

A simple 30-minute Google search found several other sources report “advanced reactor” sizes ranging from 600 to 1700 MWe.

Legislators not willing to put this much effort into learning such fundamental details have no business writing Illinois’ energy future legislation.

The governor said: “Small Modular Reactors are very beneficial. … They do seem to work very well, and they do seem to be safe, but they’re going to be several years of testing yet ahead.”

Well, no, governor, they do not. Simply because as you also said, they do not yet exist. They are proposed to have safer qualities. But none have been built to demonstrate them yet.

Throughout this process, our organization repeatedly advocated for creating a panel of qualified experts to better research these and other issues. The current level of demonstrated nuclear ignorance validates that suggestion.

September 6, 2023 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | Leave a comment