Skip to main content

TVA and Crossing the T on Yucca Mountain

The other day, we listened to the hearings for the NRC commissioners - there are three open slots - but did not follow up with the TVA candidates later that afternoon. Maybe we should have:

During the hearing, each of the nominees gave a statement and was questioned by the committee members about their suitability for the role. Each nominee said that they backed TVA's use of nuclear energy.
You can read all the quotes - and who said them - at the links but here's a taster:

"In the short run, additional generation needs to come almost surely from new nuclear."
"I am pro-nuclear and I do think it needs to be part of the solution."

To support economic growth, I think we have to have low-cost power, and that additional power may have to be through nuclear."

"We've got some old dirty coal plants and, even if we were to miss the call for increased demand, I think nuclear must be part of our solution."

And that's a clean sweep of the four candidates - TVA has a nine member board.

---

The Tennessee Valley Authority is a depression-era creation. The article describes it this way:

TVA was set up by the US Congress in 1933, primarily to reduce flood damage, improve navigation on the Tennessee River, provide electric power, and promote "agricultural and industrial development" in the region. Today, TVA is a federal corporation and the country's largest public power company, supplying the electricity needs of about nine million people.
That's about right. We'd only add that there were meant to be other "valley authorities," but Congress back then balked, so TVA is unique as a federal entity.

---

To the credit of Environment and Public Works committee chairman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and member Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), these candidates were heard on Tuesday before Washington was snowed under (again!) that night and into Wednesday - they were scheduled for today, which wouldn't have happened. The Tennesseans are probably stuck in town for a bit, but at least they can watch cable TV and swim in the hotel pool now that they've got their hearings out of the way. Not a good time for sightseeing.

---
 
And how did the NRC Commission hearings go? No problems for the candidates that we could pick up. More on this later, but we thought you'd find this exchange interesting (our transcript):

Boxer: I have a question here for all three of you from Sen. [Harry] Reid (D-Nevada) and you could just answer it yes or no: If confirmed, would you second guess the Department of Energy's decision to wirthdraw the license application for Yucca Mountain from NRC's review?

William Ostendorff: No

Boxer: Good. Anyone else?

William Magwood: No

Gregory Apostolakis: No

Boxer: Thank you. I think he will very pleased with that.

We doubt NRC would second-guess this in any circumstance. Consider it a crossed "t."

From one of my favorite movies still not on DVD, Elia Kazan's Wild River (1961), about the early days of the TVA.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Harry Reid: pothole in the road to America's clean energy future.
Pete said…
I can only hope there were other questions directed to the nominees' qualifications... or was Yucca Mountain the only litmus test issue the senators cared about?
Anonymous said…
The question itself, asked by Boxer on behalf of Reid, was far more revealing than any of the answers.

In fact, it showed just how ignorant many of our elected officials are about the agencies they presumably oversee.

But then again, for a bunch of people who see the world through the lens of political influence and deal-making and quid pro quo, it makes sense that they would project their own worldview onto three men asked to run a neutral, independent regulatory agency.

What I found notable in the testimony was Magwood's repeated reminder that on-site storage was conceptualized and designed as a temporary measure, under the premise that permanent storage would someday be available, as promised in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act.

Now that was actually substantive (if oblique) commentary on Yucca Mountain and the consequences of the current administration's decision to scuttle it as a political favor.

Magwood was essentially saying that the subject of on-site storage, as it is currently designed, would have to be revisited by NRC, perhaps even beyond the ongoing waste confidence decision deliberations at the agency.
The TVA needs to sell all of its coal and gas electric power plants to regional utilities. This would allow them to fund more nuclear power plant construction.

The TVA needs to set a good example for other private and public utilities by completely getting out of the business of fossil fuel electricity generation.
gman said…
To Anon in comment #3 - I think you are spot on in your view of this. With people like these senators running the country, we are doomed.
Anonymous said…
Magwood was essentially saying that the subject of on-site storage, as it is currently designed, would have to be revisited by NRC, perhaps even beyond the ongoing waste confidence decision deliberations at the agency.

Where and how did you get this from his remarks at the hearing?

I heard Magwood say, in response to Boxer's question from Reid, that SNF is safe to store onsite or in dry casks for at least 50-100 years.

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