Jim Doyle Rethinking Nuclear Energy

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is reporting that Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle (D) is reconsidering his longtime opposition to the expansion of nuclear energy.

Gov. Jim Doyle on Wednesday agreed with a study panel's call to change Wisconsin's 1983 moratorium on nuclear power plants to prepare for the coming national debate over that type of energy.

At a news conference, Doyle told reporters that his Task Force on Global Warming took a responsible step by recommending changes in the law.

The task force asked that Wisconsin “begin to consider (nuclear power) without the hurdles that the current law puts up — where it can’t even be really thought about,” Doyle said. “I don’t think we should be sitting with our heads in the sand.”

The 1983 law “basically keeps you from even thinking about” the process of approving a new nuclear plant in Wisconsin, he added.

“Let’s at least allow the Public Service Commission to look at” that option, the governor said, referring to the state agency that regulates utilities.

Comments

Joffan said…

Well, it would be a move in the right direction, like it would be if I stopped kicking you, even I didn't actually help you get up from the ground where I knocked you down.

What happens next, I wonder... two years of wrangling in legislative committees?

August 7, 2008 at 1:56 PM

Brian Mays said…

Well, I don't know about you, but I prefer it when people stop kicking me.

August 7, 2008 at 2:41 PM

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…

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.

What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog