Skip to main content

House Committee on Government Reform: Nuclear Is 'Only Sensible Path Forward'

Image
By Janice
The House Committee on Government Reform has issued a report aimed at advancing energy policies to sustain U.S. economic growth and reduce dependency on foreign oil and gas.

The report, “Securing America’s Energy Future,” recommends that nuclear energy become the primary provider of baseload electricity. At the same time, it calls for steps to reduce oil consumption, develop alternative transportation fuels and avoid use of natural gas as a baseload source of power.

Here are the key findings of the report:
• the current period of high, volatile oil prices is demand-driven, “and not caused by supply restrictions instituted by producers or political upheaval”
• given today’s tight global markets with little excess capacity, the United States is vulnerable to “catastrophic supply shock” in view of current geopolitics
• the United States must pursue production and conservation; these are not “either or” options
• reduction of demand for oil in the transportation sector is essential, as this sector consumes more than two-thirds of the country’s supply
• the government must strengthen corporate average fuel economy standards to help reduce demand for oil and enhance domestic competition
• in addition to developing alternative transportation fuels, the country must pursue aggressively renewable energy, clean coal technology and “next generation nuclear”
• in turning away from natural gas as a baseload source of electricity, the country must redirect its use in industries as feedstock or primary energy and not a “substitute for fuel-switching”
• nuclear must be the “primary generator of baseload energy, thereby relieving the pressure on natural gas and dramatically improving atmospheric emissions.”
Nuclear energy, the report continued, will “free natural gas supplies for critical uses in manufacturing processes, reduce electricity costs to the consumer, be emission-free and pave the way for drastically reduced petroleum dependency” with hydrogen-powered vehicles.

The report called the use of nuclear energy as the country’s primary source of baseload power “the only sensible path forward.” It strongly encouraged Congress to “acknowledge the centrality of nuclear power’s role as a solution” to global warming and climate change.

The report cited “diminishing” concerns in the scientific and technical community “over whether nuclear waste can be safely managed, and a “general agreement … that disposal in a deep geologic repository is achievable” and preferable.” In addition, the report advocated increased funding to develop advanced fuel-cycle technologies, make reprocessing more economical and address proliferation concerns.

UPDATE: More from Noblesse Oblige.

Technorati tags: , , , , , ,

Comments

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