The NRC's 17th Annual Regulatory Information Conference wrapped up yesterday, and the Commission has posted the speeches from the two newest commissioners -- Greg Jaczko and Pete Lyons.
In his remarks, "Perspectives Upon Joining the Nuclear Regulatory Commission," Commissioner Lyons recalled a congressional hearing that dealt with future energy sources:
Commissioner Lyons continued:
Comissioner Jaczko's speech was entitled, "Guiding Principles: Culture, Transparency, and Communication." And it's clear he's got a sense of humor:
With that issue out of the way, Commissioner Jaczko turned to more serious pursuits:
Remember to bookmark the NRC 2005 Speech Archive, and click here for the complete RIC program with links to all of the presentations from the conference.
In his remarks, "Perspectives Upon Joining the Nuclear Regulatory Commission," Commissioner Lyons recalled a congressional hearing that dealt with future energy sources:
Oil and gas resources were not a part of this hearing. They simply are not sustainable on this time scale. While experts debate the longevity of these options, there is no debate that each is finite. Some suggest that the world may be at or near its peak oil production, even while we witness new oil demands from developing nations to add to the thirst in developed nations. And while natural gas is more abundant and its utility will extend further into the future, prices are likely to further escalate making it harder to justify use of that resource for electricity production.
The only three suitable energy resources identified in that Hearing were renewables, coal, and nuclear energy. For each source, there are major uncertainties, risks, and benefits in its future utilization, and these issues were discussed at the Hearing. Implicit in the Hearing was the view that the world is going to be so starved for energy that rejection of any one of these sources would seriously intensify the challenge of using only the remaining ones to sustain our economic health.
Commissioner Lyons continued:
But can nuclear power really contribute to our future energy needs? Certainly there will be many contributors to answering this question. Before the answer can be “Yes,” the Department of Energy must demonstrate continued strong support for nuclear energy. This must include funding to assist in certification of new designs and workforce training within our universities. Federal or state policies that limit carbon emissions may provide further impetus. Companies offering advanced reactor designs must provide high confidence that reactor construction costs are accurately known and competitive with other energy sources. Utilities must make concrete proposals for new construction. The financial community must weigh whether their own risks have been sufficiently well managed to provide capital. And, in my view, the public probably will also demand better solutions to proliferation issues associated with nuclear power and further progress on nuclear waste before new construction orders will be placed.
But even those events won’t bring about new construction unless the public has confidence in the strong regulatory oversight of safety provided by the Commission. That oversight must be translated into continued safe operations by the nuclear utilities and continued safe uses of radioactive sources.
Comissioner Jaczko's speech was entitled, "Guiding Principles: Culture, Transparency, and Communication." And it's clear he's got a sense of humor:
But before I go into detail about my approach to the job, there is an important issue I need to address. I would like to publicly express my deep disappointment with many of the newspaper articles written about me over the last few years as I was considered for nomination to the Commission. I was deeply disturbed by them, and I will tell you why. They never, ever, provided you with an accurate description of how to say my name. So, for the record, it is pronounced "Yatsko."
With that issue out of the way, Commissioner Jaczko turned to more serious pursuits:
Of course, when we regulate we have to consider both the theoretical and the practical. And so I would like to turn to a discussion of what I believe is a triangle of three interconnected guiding principles that provide the direction we need to effectively implement the NRC’s mission. The three segments of this triangle are:
1. Instilling a safety and security culture;
2. Transparency;
3. Communication.
These three principles are central to how I conduct myself, how I manage my office, and how I believe the agency functions as an effective, responsive, and efficient regulator.
Remember to bookmark the NRC 2005 Speech Archive, and click here for the complete RIC program with links to all of the presentations from the conference.
Comments