Skip to main content

McCain, Obama on Energy in Michigan: Day 2

McCain Obama on Energy in MichiganIn advance of Senator John McCain's tour of the Fermi 2 nuclear plant this afternoon, the Obama campaign's press office has just released this statement
Barack Obama supports safe and secure nuclear energy. Nuclear power represents more than 70 percent of our noncarbon generated electricity. It is unlikely that we can meet our aggressive climate goals if we eliminate nuclear power as an option. However, before an expansion of nuclear power is considered, Obama thinks key issues must be addressed including: security of nuclear fuel and waste, waste storage, and proliferation. Barack Obama introduced legislation in the U.S. Senate to establish guidelines for tracking, controlling and accounting for spent fuel at nuclear power plants. To prevent international nuclear material from falling into terrorist hands abroad, Obama worked closely with Sen. Dick Lugar (R - IN) to strengthen international efforts to identify and stop the smuggling of weapons of mass destruction. As president, Obama will make safeguarding nuclear material both abroad and in the U.S. a top anti-terrorism priority. In terms of waste storage, Obama does not believe that Yucca Mountain is a suitable site. He will lead federal efforts to look for safe, long-term disposal solutions based on objective, scientific analysis. In the meantime, Obama will develop requirements to ensure that the waste stored at current reactor sites is contained using the most advanced dry-cask storage technology available
.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Sure. As soon as its safe, and we resolve the disposal issue.

But not Yuca mountain, lets build somethying new. Why? Nothing specific, just doesn't seem safe.

How long did it take to build Yuca mountain? Started more than a decade ago. How long will it take to build somewhere else?

Sounds to me like: "I support noise makers at birthday parties as long as nobody makes any noise."

Phony.
Anonymous said…
Sorry to post twice in a row, but I wanted to add color by showing what an alternative statement might look like. Google this quote from McCain:

McCain said there was “no way that you could ever seriously attack the issue of greenhouse gas emissions without nuclear power, and anybody who tells you differently is not telling the truth.”

Which of these men is speaking definitively and without fear of the polls?
KB said…
No need to apologize, kevinm. Comment away!
Anonymous said…
"Which of these men is speaking definitively and without fear of the polls?"

Neither. Bisconti Research and NEI tell us most Americans want new nuclear plants, right? So he's in line with the polls.

McCain as maverick is one of the biggest myths in Washington.
Anonymous said…
Obama's campaign says he does not believe that Yucca Mountain is a suitable site for a repository for U.S. defense high level wastes and and civilian wastes. Instead, Obama "will lead federal efforts to look for safe, long-term disposal solutions based on objective, scientific analysis."

Sure. Obama is a lawyer, and his "belief" about Yucca Mountain clearly does not come from his own personal expertise.

So Obama is apparently willing to cut off the independent scientific review of Yucca Mountain by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, probably because he "believes" that the NRC's likely positive conclusion on Yucca Mountain would not correspond with his negative "belief" about the Yucca Mountain's safety.

So an Obama administration will use the best science to inform its nuclear energy policy decisions. Sure.
Anonymous said…
"Obama is apparently willing to cut off the independent scientific review of Yucca Mountain by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission"

where has he said this? source?

"Obama is a lawyer, and his "belief" about Yucca Mountain clearly does not come from his own personal expertise."

what's McCain's technical background in nuclear power?
Anonymous said…
Anyone here believe that Obama will let Yucca Mountain proceed on his watch, raise your hand?

Anyone here believe that a relatively inexperienced politician lawyer will do what is right instead of what furthers their political career?

McCain has at least had much more life experiences in the military (big user of nuclear power) and the Senate (boss of the NRC) with respect to nuclear power and politics than Obama. Wisdom comes with age and exposure only.
Matthew66 said…
I think the whole waste depository issue was mishandled from the get go. The Department of Energy (or Congress) should have asked for communities to volunteer to host the facility. With the appropriate economic incentives, I am sure there would have been plenty of takers. The criteria would have required the agreement of local and state governments, and hopefully the support of the state congressional delegation. Of course, it would probably have resulted in New Mexico getting the facility and a couple of truckloads of cash.

Popular posts from this blog

Fluor Invests in NuScale

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

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

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

Wednesday Update

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