LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for BEST-L Archives


BEST-L Archives

BEST-L Archives


BEST-L@LISTS.UFL.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

BEST-L Home

BEST-L Home

BEST-L  October 2007

BEST-L October 2007

Subject:

BBC news report on US nuclear boom

From:

Kathleen Pagan <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Kathleen Pagan <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 11 Oct 2007 13:11:52 -0400

Content-Type:

multipart/related

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (203 lines) , image001.gif (203 lines) , image002.jpg (203 lines) , image003.gif (203 lines) , image004.jpg (203 lines) , image005.gif (203 lines) , image006.gif (203 lines) , image007.gif (203 lines) , image008.jpg (203 lines) , image009.jpg (203 lines)

FYI --Kathleen Pagan, Alachua County Senior Planner (Growth Management)

 

US eyes boom in nuclear reactors 

By Laura Smith-Spark 
BBC News, Washington 

 

 

The Three Mile Island accident cast a shadow over the nuclear industry

Almost three decades have passed since the last application was filed to
build a new nuclear reactor in the US. Now, up to 30 are expected in the
next three years. 

As time has passed, memories have faded of the 1979 radioactive leak at
the Three Mile Island nuclear plant in Pennsylvania that threw the US
nuclear industry into disarray. 

Meanwhile, energy security concerns and worries about climate change
have reshaped the debate, and financial incentives and a new licensing
process have altered the economics. 

The first full application for two new reactors, in southern Texas, was
submitted at the end of September. 

Another four are due by the end of the year and a dozen in 2008, many in
south-eastern states, the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
said. 

The earliest could be in operation by 2015. 

A range of factors is fuelling the renewed enthusiasm: 

*	The introduction of a new fast-track combined construction and
operation permit, making new reactors easier and cheaper to build 
*	A tax credit, introduced in the 2005 Energy Policy Act, of 1.8
cents per kilowatt hour for the first 6,000 megawatts generated by
nuclear plants 
*	Risk insurance adding up to $2bn for the first six plants to be
built, protecting companies against the cost of delays in construction 
*	Multi-billion-dollar loan guarantees 
*	A likelihood that the cost of emitting CO2 will rise as the
battle against climate change intensifies 

But the impending flood of applications is fuelling a new row over
whether nuclear power represents a bold step to address 21st Century
needs or a mistaken return to flawed 20th Century technology. 

'Reliable source' 

Supporters say new reactors are the only way to meet a projected 40%
increase in US electricity demand by 2030 - a result of the country's
growing population. 

 

 

 

The nuclear fuel cycle
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/sci_nat/05/nuclear_fuel/html/mini
ng.stm>  

"Our country needs the electricity and it needs clean sources of
electricity that are reliable - and that's exactly what nuclear energy
is," says Steve Kerekes, spokesman for industry group the Nuclear Energy
Institute (NEI). 

Thanks to improvements in efficiency, 104 reactors across 31 states
already produce 20% of the nation's total electricity supply, he points
out. 

The NEI also argues that nuclear power is cleaner than gas and
coal-fired plants and says studies show that over a nuclear plant's
life-cycle - including construction and the mining of uranium ore - its
greenhouse gas emissions are comparable to those of wind and hydro
power. 

"We wouldn't pretend for a second that we should be 100% of our energy
supply going forward - but there is a role for us to play in a
diversified energy supply that includes renewables, coal and nuclear,"
says Mr Kerekes. 

'Massive subsidies' 

However, others dispute this. 



 This is a renaissance that is only proposed because of massive - you
could say unprecedented - federal subsidies  


Tyson Slocum, Public Citizen

"It is absolutely not a clean energy source," says Tyson Slocum,
director of energy policy for public interest group Public Citizen. 

"Does it produce less greenhouse gas emissions than coal or gas? Yes. 

"But it produces waste potentially more problematic not only from the
mining aspect but from the high-level radioactive waste that a
commercial nuclear reactor is going to produce." 

Mr Slocum says the industry's apparent renaissance is due very largely
to "massive - you could say unprecedented - federal subsidies". 

"If you had a programme like this for wind and solar, wind and solar
would be the biggest energy sources in the next 20 years," he said. 

Security risk? 

The question of how nuclear waste is stored is already a controversial
issue in the US. 

 

The issue of long-term nuclear waste storage remains uncertain

A planned national repository for spent fuel at Yucca Mountain in Nevada
has run into sustained opposition from some local lawmakers, including
Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. 

The government is due to submit an application to the NRC to start
construction at the site by 30 June next year. But while it is scheduled
to open before 2020, it could still be delayed or blocked altogether. 

In the meantime, nuclear waste will continue to be stored on site at
power plants. 

Critics argue that this inevitably increases the risk that plants will
become a terror target, despite steps to give nuclear facilities extra
protection after 9/11. 

Local fight 

Public reaction to the planned expansion in reactors has so far been
fairly muted. 

Opponents say that is because the nuclear lobby has exploited concerns
over climate change. 

 

Campaigners fear a new reactor could harm Chesapeake Bay wildlife

But the NEI points to evidence that people living near existing plants
are more strongly in favour of nuclear power than the general public. 

At least one proposal has sparked local opposition, however. 

This is a bid by US energy firm Constellation, in partnership with
France's EDF, to build a new reactor at Calvert Cliffs in Maryland - the
companies filed a partial application in July and are due to file the
rest of the paperwork early next year. 

In June, Green Party activist Steve Warner founded the Chesapeake Safe
Energy Coalition to fight the plan, bringing together local people,
environmental and public interest groups. 



We would really like to see other forms of energy investigated 


Steve Warner
Maryland campaigner

He argues the addition of a new reactor, generating as much power as the
two already at Calvert Cliffs, will push combined radioactive emissions
above safe levels. 

Of particular concern to the campaigners is whether the reactor could
have an impact on the marine wildlife in the Chesapeake Bay, known for
its blue crabs. 

The project has been backed by the Calvert County authorities because it
promises to create 700 jobs, but the coalition hopes to persuade the
state legislature to oppose it. 

"The main focus is to not build any more reactors until we resolve the
waste issues and get some reasonable assurance of how they monitor the
emissions," Mr Warner said. 

"We would really like to see other forms of energy investigated." 

 

 

 



.-*** Message Scanned by Alachua County McAfee Webshield Appliance ***-.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.UFL.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager