Skip to main content

Nuclear Power On the Hill, Day 2

By
On Tuesday it was the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources holding a nuclear energy-related hearing, yesterday the Committee on Environment and Public Works served as Senate host.

The webcast of the hearing, “Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Licensing and Relicensing Processes for Nuclear Plants,” can be seen here.

Appearing before the committee:
  • Dr. Dale Klein - Chairman, Nuclear Regulatory Commission
  • Dr. Gregory B. Jaczko - Commissioner, Nuclear Regulatory Commission
  • Dr. Peter B. Lyons - Commissioner, Nuclear Regulatory Commission
  • Ms. Kristine L. Svinicki - Commissioner, Nuclear Regulatory Commission
  • Mr. Hubert T. Bell - Inspector General, Nuclear Regulatory Commission
  • Mr. David A. Christian - President and Chief Nuclear Officer, Dominion
  • Mr. Anthony R. Pietrangelo- Vice President for Regulatory Affairs, Nuclear Energy Institute
  • Mr. Richard Webster - Legal Director, Eastern Environmental Law Center
  • Dr. Joseph Romm - Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress
  • Mr. H. John Gilbertson Jr. - Managing Director, Goldman, Sachs & Co.
Tony Pietrangelo wasn't the only NEI employee discussing nuclear energy in DC yesterday: Carol Berrigan, NEI's Director of Industry Infrastructure, appeared at a U.S. Energy Association forum at the National Press Club. C-SPAN's video of the event can be seen here.

Labels:

Comments

David Bradish said…
The EPW hearing had some interesting discussion on new nuclear plant costs at the third hour and fifth minute of the video. Most of the panelists and committee members were completely aware that new nuclear plants are still very economical despite the significant rise in projected capital costs.

The Goldman and Sachs panelist was very supportive of nuclear which goes against many of the claims antis use to say "Wall Street won't finance new nuclear plants."

Also, Dominion's David Christian explained that Dominion is always evaluating costs of electricity from new power plants and that they find new nuclear to be economical.

It was really promising to hear that the commenters understood the big picture of our energy situation and that they didn't look at nuclear's costs in a bubble, contrary to what Joseph Romm did on the panel. Needless to say, I didn't hear anyone ask Romm a question.

The hilarious part of the Q&A was when Senator Voinovich called the notion that wind and solar could provide baseload electricity "poppycock."
July 17, 2008 at 1:13 PM
Anonymous said…
The Goldman and Sachs panelist was very supportive of nuclear which goes against many of the claims antis use to say "Wall Street won't finance new nuclear plants."

Just proves that everyone hears only what they want to hear. Check out Gilbertson's prepared testimony, which carries a number of caveats and market concerns.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Hearing&Hearing_ID=0a44d3c6-802a-23ad-46ee-8d6b0b283265
July 17, 2008 at 7:54 PM
David Bradish said…
Check out Gilbertson's prepared testimony, which carries a number of caveats and market concerns.

Name me one energy technology that doesn't have a market concern or caveat.
July 17, 2008 at 8:27 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Fluor Invests in NuScale

By
You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap
1 comment
Read more

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

By
Ohio faces a decision soon about its two nuclear reactors, Davis-Besse and Perry, and on Wednesday, neighbors of one of those plants issued a cry for help. The reactors’ problem is that the price of electricity they sell on the high-voltage grid is depressed, mostly because of a surplus of natural gas. And the reactors do not get any revenue for the other benefits they provide. Some of those benefits are regional – emissions-free electricity, reliability with months of fuel on-site, and diversity in case of problems or price spikes with gas or coal, state and federal payroll taxes, and national economic stimulus as the plants buy fuel, supplies and services. Some of the benefits are highly localized, including employment and property taxes. One locality is already feeling the pinch: Oak Harbor on Lake Erie, home to Davis-Besse. The town has a middle school in a building that is 106 years old, and an elementary school from the 1950s, and on May 2 was scheduled to have a referendu
Post a Comment
Read more

Wednesday Update

By
From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin
Post a Comment
Read more