Skip to main content

Early Responses to Kerry-Boxer

clip_image001Just in case you thought we’d have to wait a bit for some comment on the Kerry-Boxer climate change bill introduced yesterday, think again. Here’s Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska):

“We’ve got to be honest with ourselves if we are truly going to decrease emissions,” Murkowski said.  “Nuclear energy must be a part of our energy mix if we are going to do so.”

We guess some of our readers consider that Republican boilerplate, but remember that the bill itself is very friendly in its preamble to nuclear energy. Since Murkowski is on a committee that gets a crack at this – Energy and Natural Resources - look to her (among others, of course) to push for the nuclear imperative.

---

And she’s not the only one. Here’s Sen. John McCain (R—Ariz.):

The bill introduced Wednesday by Sens. John Kerry, [D-Mass.], and Barbara Boxer, [D-Calif.], has "nothing about nuclear power," McCain complained in the interview, which was part of the "First Draft of History" forum sponsored by The Atlantic and the Aspen Institute. "It's the left-wing environmental organizations that are not allowing us to move forward with nuclear power."

The second part of his quote is somewhat curious, since all kinds of organizations had meetings on the Hill about this bill. Clearly, the legislation is, by design, like a Christmas tree waiting for its ornaments; McCain will probably be hanging some of those when he gets the chance. And like Murkowski, we expect he’ll be looking at the nuclear portion very carefully.

---

And Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.):

“These are fancy, complicated words for high-cost energy that sends jobs overseas looking for cheap energy. Instead, we should take practical steps to produce low-cost, clean, carbon-free energy and create jobs. Specifically, we should build 100 new nuclear plants, electrify half our cars and trucks, expand exploration offshore for American natural gas and oil, and double funding for energy research and development.”

We’ve always liked Alexander’s thinking about energy – for the obvious reasons, of course – but also because, as seen here, he thinks very broadly and has a good grasp of the complexities of energy policy. He thinks big and captures the breadth of the subject..

Here’s a little more:

We need to commit to building new reactors. Even Energy Secretary Steven Chu has said that he supports using nuclear energy to solve the energy crisis.”

So there you go.

Sens. Kerry and Boxer

Comments

DocForesight said…
I read Sen. Murkowski's complete reaction to the "Pollution Reduction" bill. I don't know where you find it being "Republican boilerplate". It seems pretty well-reasoned and devoid of partisan "bickering".

Coming from a Senator representing one of our more vital energy producing states - and that being liquid fuel, not nuclear fuel - I think her support for nuclear power stations is laudable and worthy of approbation.

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