Skip to main content

The Politics of It All: Running Out the Clock on Energy

By

Nancy-Pelosi Politico report on the maneuvering around energy that the House is attempting: while making conciliatory noises about offshore drilling, the goal is to run out the clock while letting endangered Democrats make the case back home that they’re in-line with the current polls that support all those new derricks. And why might the Dems do this?

[House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi’s [D-Calif.] gambit rests on one big assumption: that Democrats will own Washington after the election and will be able to craft a sweeping energy policy that is heavy on conservation and fuel alternatives while allowing for some new oil drilling. Democrats see no need to make major concessions on energy policy with a party poised to lose seats in both chambers in just three months — even if recess-averse Republicans continue to pound away on the issue.

Well, okay. Pelosi’s energy preferences don’t seem that far away from the bi-partisan energy bill we wrote about yesterday, so that might stand up well in a new Congress; and yes, politics will trump policy when there are electoral considerations. We get that. (We also get that even gloomy predictions keep the Democrats below a veto-proof 60-vote majority in the Senate. So the Republicans will still have some room to play.) Read the whole thing, but if the milk curdles in your coffee, don’t blame us.

Politics? Sometimes it makes us want to holler.

Picture of Rep. Nancy Pelosi.

Labels:

Comments

Matthew66 said…
The problem with waiting until the new Congress and Administration is that politicians change tack when they have no effective opposition. If, as polls currently predict, the Democrats have the White House and majorities in both houses of Congress, lots of those congressional Democrats will be insisting that their pet projects in energy take priority, which may spell curtains for a decent energy policy. Peloi could end up in the same situation as Angela Merkel, having to put up with important players with entrenched ideological positions refusing to give ground.

We are still three months out from the election. If a week is a long time in politics, three months is an eternity.
August 6, 2008 at 11:13 AM
Anonymous said…
Pelosi could end up in the same situation as Angela Merkel, having to put up with important players with entrenched ideological positions refusing to give ground.

Funny - I though Pelosi was an important player with an entrenched ideological position refusing to give ground!
August 6, 2008 at 6:19 PM
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