Skip to main content

Judd Gregg Calls for Expansion of Nuclear Power

By
Judd GreggIn a meeting with editors from the Keene Sentinel, New Hampshire Senator Judd Gregg (R) had some interesting things to say about nuclear energy's future in the state and Senate.
“If we move forward aggressively with the policy of producing more American energy and conserving more American energy, and show the world that we’re serious about the supply side, that will lead to further reduction in the price of oil,” Gregg said. “And that will take pressure off the economy, which is really reeling from the huge increase in energy costs.”

The energy policies of those in government are beginning to move in a similar direction despite partisan differences, he said.

“There’s always been consensus on conservation and renewables,” Gregg said. “Now we’re seeing some consensus develop around production.”

Along with gas, and oil from offshore drilling, Gregg said nuclear energy should have a role.

“We have not lost a single life to nuclear power in this country,” Gregg said. “We are running nuclear power plants all over this country, and we’re running a navy that’s nuclear generated. So we know how to deal with nuclear energy. We know how to make it safe. And we know how to produce it.

“Yes, nuclear power plants have a life expectancy, and at the end of their life expectancy they get shut down,” he said. “We just shut one down in Maine, for example.”

Vermont Yankee, a nuclear power plant in Vernon, Vt., is set to have its operating license expire in 2012. Plant owner Entergy Nuclear is seeking permission to extend its license another 20 years.

“If they can do it safely, they should do it,” Gregg said.

“We haven’t licensed a plant for 27 years,” he said. “The last one to come online was Seabrook (N.H.). Seabrook’s now been operating for almost 20 years, without any problems, generated a lot of electricity and been a very efficient way for us not to buy oil.

Gregg said legislators should consider whether another nuclear power plant at Seabrook would be appropriate.

“We should be using more nuclear power,” he said. “It is clean. It does not affect the global environment. And it is domestic.”
Labels:

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