Skip to main content

This Week on the Hill

Image
By Janice
"This Week on the Hill" is a new feature on NEI Nuclear Notes. We'll be listing all relevant congressional hearings for the upcoming week and beyond. Please note that the dates, times and locations are subject to change - but we'll do our best to stay on top of things.

Senate Appropriations Energy and Water Subcommittee: Hearing to examine proposed budget estimates for fiscal 2007 for the Office of Science, the Energy Supply and Conservation account, and the Fossil Energy Research and Development account within the Department of Energy. Tuesday, March 14, 2:30 p.m. (138 Dirksen Building).

House Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcommittee: Hearing on fiscal 2007 appropriations for DOE nuclear waste disposal. Scheduled to testify: acting director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. Wednesday, March 15, 10 a.m. (2362-B Rayburn Building).

House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality: Hearing on the status of the Yucca Mountain program. Wednesday, March 15, 2 p.m. (2123 Rayburn Building).

House Appropriations Energy and Water Development Subcommiteee: Hearing on fiscal 2007 appropriations for DOE energy supply and conservation. Scheduled to testify: under secretary for energy, science and environment; acting director of the Office of Nuclear Energy; acting assistant secretary for energy efficiency and renewable energy; assistant secretary for fossil energy; director of electricity delivery and energy reliability. Thursday, March 16, 10 a.m. (2362-B Rayburn Building).

Senate Appropriations Energy and Water Subcommittee: Hearing on Yucca Mountain/Office of Safeguards and Security. Thursday, March 30, 10 a.m. (138 Dirksen Building).

Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee: Climate conference to address the challenge of creating a market-based greenhouse gas regulatory system. Tuesday, April 4, 9:30 a.m.-noon and 2:30-5 p.m. Proposals to address this issue are due by 5 p.m. today. They can be submitted to climate_conference@energy.senate.gov. For more information, click here.

Technorati tags: , , , , , ,

Comments

Anonymous said…
Please also see:

Senator Clinton Wins NRC Commitment to Conduct an In-Depth Review of Indian Point at web page:

http://clinton.senate.gov/news/statements/details.cfm?id=252506&&

and the audio exchange between her and NRC Chairman Diaz may be found at:

http://www.clinton.senate.gov/audio/clinton030906m.mp3
March 14, 2006 at 10:48 AM
Anonymous said…
What a bitch.


In spite of being an European liberal (anti-guns, pro-abortion, anti-religion, anti-war, anti-Bush, the lot) I would NEVER vote for someone like Hillary Clinton.

She reminds me of the European "green" hypocrites who want to replace clean and cheap nuclear power with dirty, expensive and unreliable natural gas.

Bleh!
March 14, 2006 at 4:00 PM
Anonymous said…
Yeah, Starvid, yeah! You're absolutely right [except that I am a neo-con, right wing, pro-Bush SOB ;-)]
March 14, 2006 at 8:58 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

By
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...
23 comments
Read more

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

By
Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...
7 comments
Read more

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

By
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...
6 comments
Read more