JFK AT THE OAK RIDGE RESEARCH REACTORRod Adams, publisher of Atomic Insights http://www.atomicinsights.com/ observes a growing interest in nuclear energy within Democratic Party circles. Democrats are often stereotyped as anti-nuclear but surveys have shown that rank and file Democratic voters support expansion of nuclear power by a 2 to 1 margin (Rasmussen Reports, August 2005). As Adams points out, great Democrats like Al Gore, Sr. and Henry "Scoop" Jackson were among the original proponents of building nuclear plants to meet our nation's energy needs.
Adams writes in the informative Atomic Insights blog:
For the past 30 years, there has been a perception, sometimes reinforced by actions and statements, that the US Democratic Party is reflexively anti-nuclear. At the same time, it has been the perception, sometimes reinforced with words, if not action, that the Republican Party at least wants to "keep the nuclear option open". When involved in discussions with people in the industry or related academic or government fields, I have tried to persuade people that these perceptions are over simplified and not terribly useful to the continued development of safe, clean, abundant nuclear energy.
I remind people that some of the major political support for the technology in its earliest days came from strong Democrats like Senator Al Gore Sr., Senator Henry M. Jackson and L. Mendel Rivers. I also point out that it was President Ford, not President Carter who initially signed the Executive Order that forced the shutdown of the nuclear fuel recycling industry just when it was getting to a point where it could start operating profitably.
http://tinyurl.com/267zuh
Another article also suggests increasing Democratic backing for expanded nuclear power as a means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions which contribute to global warming.
James Hoare
Environment News
Publication Date: February 1, 2007
The Heartland Institute
http://www.heartland.org/
Nuclear power offers a safe and economical way to meet anticipated growth in American energy demand, according to an October 2006 report by the Progressive Policy Institute, a policy arm of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC).
The report, "A Progressive Energy Platform," praises nuclear power as a key weapon against asserted global climate change and air quality concerns.
"Nuclear power holds great potential to be an integral part of a diversified energy portfolio for America," the report states. "It produces no greenhouse gas emissions, so it can help clean up the air and combat climate change."
New Technological Advances
Key to the DLC's support for nuclear power are technological advances that substantially improve on an already impressive safety and environmental record.
"New plant designs promise to produce power more safely and economically than first-generation facilities," the report explains. "For example, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has certified three new designs that would use significantly fewer pumps, pipes, valves, and cables than first-generation facilities.
"That will reduce the plants' complexity, making them easier to inspect and maintain," the report continues. "From a safety perspective, the new plants rely on natural forces such as gravity, natural circulation, and condensation, assuring safe shutdown even in the event of an accident."
The report also notes further advances in nuclear plant design.
"In addition to these three new approved designs," the report adds, "at least four other designs may soon win NRC approval. Among these is the promising modular, 'pebble bed' reactor design. As the name suggests, these smaller plants would use hundreds of thousands of uranium pebbles rather than large cores to generate power. As researchers at MIT recently concluded, these pebbles burn more completely than their traditional counterparts."
Deregulation Needed
The report stresses, however, that technological advances such as pebble bed reactors require a great deal of time to navigate through regulatory processes and actually get built.
As a result, the report encourages Democrats to take action now to remove regulatory hurdles that slow the development and construction process.
"It will take time to bring these next-generation facilities online. Progressives should support efforts to expedite the process," the report urges.
"We certainly welcome the Progressive Policy Institute support," Nuclear Energy Institute spokesman Steve Kerekes said. "It reflects the fact that there is considerable bipartisan support for nuclear energy and there has been such support for a long time.
"We anticipate this report will have a positive impact among Democrats and among citizens as a whole," Kerekes added. "Support for clean, safe, and economical nuclear power continues to build all across America."
http://tinyurl.com/2bcxxn
Adams writes in the informative Atomic Insights blog:
For the past 30 years, there has been a perception, sometimes reinforced by actions and statements, that the US Democratic Party is reflexively anti-nuclear. At the same time, it has been the perception, sometimes reinforced with words, if not action, that the Republican Party at least wants to "keep the nuclear option open". When involved in discussions with people in the industry or related academic or government fields, I have tried to persuade people that these perceptions are over simplified and not terribly useful to the continued development of safe, clean, abundant nuclear energy.
I remind people that some of the major political support for the technology in its earliest days came from strong Democrats like Senator Al Gore Sr., Senator Henry M. Jackson and L. Mendel Rivers. I also point out that it was President Ford, not President Carter who initially signed the Executive Order that forced the shutdown of the nuclear fuel recycling industry just when it was getting to a point where it could start operating profitably.
http://tinyurl.com/267zuh
Another article also suggests increasing Democratic backing for expanded nuclear power as a means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions which contribute to global warming.
James Hoare
Environment News
Publication Date: February 1, 2007
The Heartland Institute
http://www.heartland.org/
Nuclear power offers a safe and economical way to meet anticipated growth in American energy demand, according to an October 2006 report by the Progressive Policy Institute, a policy arm of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC).
The report, "A Progressive Energy Platform," praises nuclear power as a key weapon against asserted global climate change and air quality concerns.
"Nuclear power holds great potential to be an integral part of a diversified energy portfolio for America," the report states. "It produces no greenhouse gas emissions, so it can help clean up the air and combat climate change."
New Technological Advances
Key to the DLC's support for nuclear power are technological advances that substantially improve on an already impressive safety and environmental record.
"New plant designs promise to produce power more safely and economically than first-generation facilities," the report explains. "For example, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has certified three new designs that would use significantly fewer pumps, pipes, valves, and cables than first-generation facilities.
"That will reduce the plants' complexity, making them easier to inspect and maintain," the report continues. "From a safety perspective, the new plants rely on natural forces such as gravity, natural circulation, and condensation, assuring safe shutdown even in the event of an accident."
The report also notes further advances in nuclear plant design.
"In addition to these three new approved designs," the report adds, "at least four other designs may soon win NRC approval. Among these is the promising modular, 'pebble bed' reactor design. As the name suggests, these smaller plants would use hundreds of thousands of uranium pebbles rather than large cores to generate power. As researchers at MIT recently concluded, these pebbles burn more completely than their traditional counterparts."
Deregulation Needed
The report stresses, however, that technological advances such as pebble bed reactors require a great deal of time to navigate through regulatory processes and actually get built.
As a result, the report encourages Democrats to take action now to remove regulatory hurdles that slow the development and construction process.
"It will take time to bring these next-generation facilities online. Progressives should support efforts to expedite the process," the report urges.
"We certainly welcome the Progressive Policy Institute support," Nuclear Energy Institute spokesman Steve Kerekes said. "It reflects the fact that there is considerable bipartisan support for nuclear energy and there has been such support for a long time.
"We anticipate this report will have a positive impact among Democrats and among citizens as a whole," Kerekes added. "Support for clean, safe, and economical nuclear power continues to build all across America."
http://tinyurl.com/2bcxxn
4 comments:
One thing that politically active people who support the intelligent use of nuclear power can do is to write to their representatives and ask them to fully fund the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
This is not a request for a subsidy - the NRC does not help anyone build power plants by providing funds to support them. Instead, the NRC's task is to carefully review license applications, power plant operations, and construction/manufacturing programs.
Because of the current budget impasse, the NRC is being limited to last year's budget level even though the demands for its regulatory oversight are growing and even though the US Treasury is receiving an increased quantity of fees paid by licensee and applicants in order to pay for the service.
Obviously, the only response that the NRC can have is to watch its spending, hire fewer people and stretch out reviews. That is simply going to add to the time and cost of a proper license application process.
Of course, in my cynical mind, I sometimes believe that such seemingly illogical situations are the product of devious minds that know that any delays in nuclear power plant construction and operation will benefit their current business of selling old fashioned fossil fuel power.
Here in Britain, nuclear power was used as an excuse for the ostensibly economic, but in fact purely political, destruction of the coal industry and of the civilised communities, working-class in the true sense, thus sustained. But nuclear power does in fact offer, throughout the Western world and no doubt beyond, the possibility of recreating working-class communities based on high-wage, high-skill, high-status jobs. This cannot be said of, for example, wind farms.
Furthermore, nuclear power offers independence from the ghastly dynasty that bankrolls both the Bushes and bin Laden, as well as from the affairs of the Middle East tout court, not to mention from Russian gas. Energy will be the real diplomatic weapon of the coming decades, and we need our own.
Dude, I read you as often as possible, but don't comment nearly enough to your fine blog. I just want to thank you for what you are doing over here. I totally admire ANY independent thinker... and you are definitely that. Blog ON, Sir!
NRC is fully funded. They charge licencees for inspection, enforcement, license application/ammendment services provided. The problem, as in all cases of federal (state, local, etc.) is that money is diverted to other (pork) causes. We pay taxes and fees under the presumption that they will be used for the advertised causes... Fact is, this is NEVER the result... Senate and Congress is to blame... One only needs to look at FAA or Yucca Mtn funding to recognize the mis-appropriation of funds.
Post a Comment