More Misinformation

The Illinois State University chapter of the Student Environmental Action Coaltion ,one of the groups organizing the press conference Kelly Taylor mentioned below, has a website. On the front page is a notice about the NRC hearing tonight in Clinton on the draft Environmental Impact Statement for Exelon's Early Site Permit (ESP) application. The group urges people to attend and says

This is the last opportunity to voice your concerns to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

This is yet another tactic by anti-nuclear extremists that makes my blood boil.

This is absolutely not the last opportunity for public comment in the licensing process for new nuclear power plants. It is probable that this well-meaning student group is simply parroting what they have been told by the likes of PACE, Public Citizen and NIRS, but I would encourage them, and other environmental groups, to check the facts. If they did, they would find that, in addition to the public comment period on the Environmental Impact Statement, interested citizens can also raise their concerns prior to the NRC's final Safety Evaluation Report and during the evaluation phase for a combined Construction and Operating license (COL). They can even comment during the NRC's post-construction review that ensures that a plant was built in accordance with the requirements of the license (called the Inspection, Test, Analysis, and Acceptance Criteria).

The primary difference from the previous process is that the NRC will resolve all licensing issues prior to a utility making the enormous investment to begin construction. That means that after an ESP and COL are issued, and assuming the proposed plant is of a design already certified by the NRC, the only comments that will be accepted are those that relate to whether the as-built condition matches the licensed design.

Clearly, the new licensing process does not prevent anyone from making their voice heard. Honest environmentalists would do well to stop spreading the lies of antinuclear extremists.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Environment, Energy, Politics, Technology, Economics

Comments

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog