Some Smiles in Tough Times for Nuclear Power

Federal backing for the first new reactor in decades has given a lift to an industry that has lots of issues.

MIDDLETOWN, PA - MARCH 28: The Three Mile Island Nuclear Plant is seen in the early morning hours March 28, 2011 in Middletown, Pennsylvania. (Photo Jeff Fusco/Getty Images)
National Journal
Clare Foran
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Clare Foran
Feb. 21, 2014, 1:29 p.m.

Amid cheers over an ad­min­is­tra­tion de­cision to give fin­an­cial back­ing to a pair of nuc­le­ar re­act­ors, in­dustry boost­ers are quick to point out that the pres­id­ent’s re­cord on nuc­le­ar power is mixed.

“The ad­min­is­tra­tion has done some pos­it­ive things with re­spect to nuc­le­ar power. But we don’t agree with all of the de­cisions that have been made,” Richard My­ers, vice pres­id­ent for policy de­vel­op­ment at the Nuc­le­ar En­ergy In­sti­tute, a pro­nuc­lear lob­by­ing group, said in an in­ter­view.

So what makes it in­to the “pro” column when it comes time for the in­dustry to weigh in on ad­min­is­tra­tion policy?

To start, the pres­id­ent has lent sup­port to nuc­le­ar as part of his “all of the above” en­ergy policy, with En­ergy Sec­ret­ary Ern­est Mon­iz em­phas­iz­ing on more than one oc­ca­sion that nuc­le­ar is a key in­gredi­ent in plans to lower car­bon emis­sions across the coun­try.

The ad­min­is­tra­tion has also backed nuc­le­ar with mon­et­ary muscle.

The En­ergy De­part­ment fi­nal­ized a loan guar­an­tee Wed­nes­day to the tune of $6.5 bil­lion dol­lars to fin­ance con­struc­tion of two nuc­le­ar re­act­ors at South­ern Com­pany’s Vo­gtle plant in Waynes­boro, Ga. Once com­plete, the re­act­ors will be the first to be built in the U.S. in three dec­ades.

The ad­min­is­tra­tion has also doled out grants to sup­port nuc­le­ar R&D, in­clud­ing a $452 mil­lion fund ad­min­istered by DOE to help de­vel­op small mod­u­lar re­act­ors, a new gen­er­a­tion of re­act­ors the in­dustry hopes will prove less costly and more flex­ible than lar­ger power gen­er­at­ors.

All this sits re­l­at­ively well with the in­dustry. But there have also been policies that haven’t gone down as smoothly.

A ma­jor thorn in the in­dustry’s side is the very lit­er­ally ra­dio­act­ive prob­lem of what to do with nuc­le­ar waste from ex­ist­ing power plants — an is­sue the in­dustry sees as one largely cre­ated by Pres­id­ent Obama.

Dur­ing his first term in of­fice, Obama put a hold on con­struc­tion of a nuc­le­ar-waste stor­age site at Yucca Moun­tain in Nevada. Last sum­mer, a fed­er­al ap­peals court ruled that the Nuc­le­ar Reg­u­lat­ory Com­mis­sion should pro­ceed with con­sid­er­a­tion of an ap­plic­a­tion to con­struct the re­pos­it­ory, but Yucca’s fate re­mains un­cer­tain. In the mean­time, nuc­le­ar waste is pil­ing up in in­ter­im stor­age fa­cil­it­ies across the coun­try.

“We don’t be­lieve Obama had the leg­al au­thor­ity or the sci­entif­ic basis to can­cel the Yucca pro­ject. We do not think that was the right move,” My­ers said.

Some in­dustry back­ers also find fault with the re­cently fi­nal­ized loan guar­an­tee.

The loan guar­an­tee “turned out not to be the game changer we had hoped,” said Mar­garet Hard­ing, a spokes­wo­man for the Amer­ic­an Nuc­le­ar So­ci­ety, a non­profit sci­ence and edu­ca­tion­al mem­ber­ship or­gan­iz­a­tion. “The re­act­ors were on track to be built any­way largely be­cause of state-level sup­port. So it could have been more ef­fect­ive for pro­jects that face a harder time get­ting off the ground to have re­ceived ad­min­is­tra­tion back­ing.”

One of the ma­jor reas­ons the in­dustry is fo­cused on ad­min­is­tra­tion policy is be­cause nuc­le­ar isn’t faring well in the free mar­ket. Most power com­pan­ies are opt­ing to build nat­ur­al-gas-fired plants over nuc­le­ar and oth­er forms of fuel such as coal due to the re­l­at­ively low cost of con­struc­tion and the low price of nat­ur­al gas. As a res­ult, if nuc­le­ar needs a boost, in­dustry is look­ing to states and the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment to provide it.

Crit­ics of nuc­le­ar power warn, however, that dif­fi­cult hurdles re­main.

“Nuc­le­ar can’t com­pete with nat­ur­al gas, and it’s also go­ing to have a hard time com­pet­ing with re­new­ables,” said Mi­chael Mari­otte, ex­ec­ut­ive dir­ect­or of the non­profit Nuc­le­ar In­form­a­tion and Re­source Ser­vice, an an­ti­nuc­lear watch­dog group. “What we’re see­ing with dis­trib­uted gen­er­a­tion like sol­ar is a new mod­el for elec­tri­city gen­er­a­tion and de­ploy­ment, and it’s a mod­el where large base-load forms of power gen­er­a­tion like nuc­le­ar just don’t have as large of a role to play.”

What We're Following See More »
WON’T INTERFERE IN STRUCTURING NSC OFFICE
White House to Give McMaster Carte Blanche
1 hours ago
THE LATEST
RESTROOM ISSUES RETURN
Trump To Rescind Trans Protections
3 hours ago
THE DETAILS

Donald Trump is planning to reverse an Obama-era order requiring that schools allow students to use the bathroom that coincides with their gender identity. Trump "has green-lighted the plan for the Justice Department and Education Department to send a “Dear Colleague” letter to schools rescinding the guidance." A case is going before the Supreme Court on March 28 in which Gavin Grimm, a transgender high school student, is suing his high school for forbidding him to use the men's room.

Source:
NAIVE, RISK TAKER
Russia Compiling Dossier on Trump’s Mind
4 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Retired Russian diplomats and members of Vladimir Putin's staff are compiling a dossier "on Donald Trump's psychological makeup" for the Russian leader. "Among its preliminary conclusions is that the new American leader is a risk-taker who can be naïve, according to a senior Kremlin adviser."

Source:
“HORRIBLE” AND “PAINFUL”
Trump Addresses Threats On Jewish Community Centers
6 hours ago
THE DETAILS
COULD COME TUESDAY
Trump Set To Issue New Travel Ban
6 hours ago
THE DETAILS

Donald Trump is set to issue a new and more focused executive order clarifying the scope of his travel ban, hoping that the order will survive legal challenges. The new order would focus on the same seven countries, "but would only bar entry to those without a visa and who have never entered the United States before. Unlike the original order, people from those countries who already have permanent U.S. residency (green cards) or visas would not face any restrictions." Some lawyers believe the government will now have much stronger standing, though lawyers who challenged the initial order see the same core problems with the forthcoming ban.

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login