Skip to main content

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

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

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Nuclear Is a Long-Term Investment for Ohio that Will Pay Big

With 50 different state legislative calendars, more than half of them adjourn by June, and those still in session throughout the year usually take a recess in the summer. So springtime is prime time for state legislative activity. In the next few weeks, legislatures are hosting hearings and calling for votes on bills that have been battered back and forth in the capital halls.

On Tuesday, The Ohio Public Utilities Committee hosted its third round of hearings on the Zero Emissions Nuclear Resources Program, House Bill 178, and NEI’s Maria Korsnick testified before a jam-packed room of legislators.


Washingtonians parachuting into state debates can be a tricky platform, but in this case, Maria’s remarks provided national perspective that put the Ohio conundrum into context. At the heart of this debate is the impact nuclear plants have on local jobs and the local economy, and that nuclear assets should be viewed as “long-term investments” for the state. Of course, clean air and electrons …