Skip to main content

The Governors Meet in Washington

U.S.Governors We’ve noted here a few times –more than a few – that the states are taking a shine to nuclear energy that has made the feds look a little, shall we say, laggard. But this federalism thing is a two way street, so some governors are talking up energy issues with President Obama at a climate change symposium in Washington:

Gov. Jennifer Granholm [D-Mich.] is heading to Washington to talk about how clean energy technology can create jobs.

The Democratic governor will attend a symposium Tuesday on the challenges of building a renewable energy economy. U.S. lawmakers, business leaders and climate change economists also will attend.

and:

Governor Jim Doyle [D-Wisc.] is in Washington, D.C. today and tomorrow to meet with President Obama’s energy, environment and agriculture cabinet to build upon current state, national, and international efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, promote low carbon technologies, and build jobs in the energy and agricultural sectors.

You get the idea – nothing here really about nuclear or any other specific energy source. It’s all about the jobs. But Doyle in particular has been one of those governors interested in moving the nuclear discussion forward at the state level and Granholm has a few plants in her state. And we’re reasonably sure some of the other attendees will have things to say on this issue. In November, candidate Obama made soothing noises to the governors at a similar confab:

Further, we will invest $15 billion each year to catalyze private sector efforts to build a clean energy future. We will invest in solar power, wind power, and next generation biofuels. We will tap nuclear power, while making sure it’s safe. And we will develop clean coal technologies.

Now, we won’t pretend that nuclear energy will be tops of the pops with the Obama administration, and we won’t snatch up every nice comment like dogs waiting to be patted on the head. But we do feel that America is just a few steps behind Europe in recognizing that you cannot get to a plausible energy policy that foregrounds carbon emission reduction and tough deadlines without nuclear energy. All the renewables put together cannot do it (scalability issues, nascent technologies) and clean coal really cannot do it (you can research this one yourself – start here for the most positive assessment imaginable and work your way outward).

And a fair number of governors get that. As does the European Union – and the Arab peninsula – and southeast Asia – etc.

Not from the current meeting, but a gaggle (a flock? a murder?) of governors.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Billion Miles Under Nuclear Energy (Updated)

And the winner is…Cassini-Huygens, in triple overtime.

The spaceship conceived in 1982 and launched fifteen years later, will crash into Saturn on September 15, after a mission of 19 years and 355 days, powered by the audacity and technical prowess of scientists and engineers from 17 different countries, and 72 pounds of plutonium.

The mission was so successful that it was extended three times; it was intended to last only until 2008.

Since April, the ship has been continuing to orbit Saturn, swinging through the 1,500-mile gap between the planet and its rings, an area not previously explored. This is a good maneuver for a spaceship nearing the end of its mission, since colliding with a rock could end things early.

Cassini will dive a little deeper and plunge toward Saturn’s surface, where it will transmit data until it burns up in the planet’s atmosphere. The radio signal will arrive here early Friday morning, Eastern time. A NASA video explains.

In the years since Cassini has launc…

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 …

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…