Skip to main content

Winning Some, Losing Some

freudenthal_wy_gov_compressed This is the winning one:

The Iowa Senate approved a bill that would allow an Iowa energy company to raise fees to pay for a study on the feasibility of building a nuclear power plant in the state. The bill is a stepping stone in what lawmakers called a scramble to turn to carbon-neutral energy sources.

In other words, Iowa wants to have a plant if a plant makes sense there. It won handily, too:

The bill easily passed 37-13, but opponents raised questions about the disposal of nuclear waste, why nuclear had priority over other forms of renewable energy and whether lawmakers should back a rate fee hike during the recession. MidAmerican would charge a fee increase of 0.5 percent of its revenues to collect $15 million to conduct the study.

We guess that answers the last one – which means the opponents were pulling arguments out of a hat – and the first belongs to the federal government. The second seems fair enough, so we breezed on over to MidAmerican’s Web site to see what they might be doing in this regard. Answer:

MidAmerican Energy Company, our Iowa-based utility subsidiary, is No. 1 in the nation in ownership of wind-powered electric generation among rate-regulated utilities and has more than 1,200 megawatts of wind energy facilities in operation, under construction and under contract in Iowa.

Landowners who agreed to install turbines on their land receive an annual per-turbine payment from the utility, which provides local agricultural-based economies with a new cash crop.

So as far as we can tell, that’s another one out of the hat. We think the opponents of this bill are sore losers.

---

This is the losing one:

Wyoming Gov. Dave Freudenthal vetoed three bills, including one that called for creating a task force to encourage nuclear energy production in the state.

And why might he do that?

In his written veto message of the nuclear energy production study bill, House Bill 97, Freudenthal stated it seemed to be focused more at holding meetings and media forums than on real analytical work.

While the bill called for studying nuclear storage issues, Freudenthal noted that the Legislature already had passed a law on the issue in the mid-1990s, giving itself complete authority over siting, construction and operation of storage facilities.

"While such a study may benefit a select few, I fail to see a compelling need to spend time and money on this issue at this time," Freudenthal wrote.

This one is kind of an “eh” outcome – it sounds as though Freudenthal is tossing bills to keep his state’s budget balanced and it may also be he doesn’t care for task forces. (Freudenthal doesn’t seem anti-nuclear per se. See here for more – he really likes uranium mining but has good things to say about nuclear energy, too.)

And of course, the Iowa measure could well be vetoed, too – and the Wyoming veto might be overridden.

The more important point to take away from these two stories is that the states are starting to work with nuclear energy within their energy policies. We’ll see  more bills addressing nuclear energy in the coming few years – much as we’d prefer legislative success, even the failures are for that year only and show forward momentum regardless of local outcome.

So, success, good, failure, less good but fine. We’ll take it all for what it portends.

Wyoming Governor Dave Freudenthal. He has a bucking bronco on his tie – that probably goes over very well in Wyoming.

Comments

Meredith Angwin said…
Great post, because it acknowledges the nuances of pro and anti-nuclear in politics. In Vermont, we definitely have our hard-core antis, LOTS of them, but we also have people who have concerns with the Entergy-Enexus spin-off, the statements made by VY about underground pipes, and whether we can get all the power we need from HydroQuebec. It's never simple, except in the view of the committed antis. They make the most noise, of course.
Anonymous said…
Gov. Freudenthal may be right. You probably don't need another task force or study group. You're either going to do it or not, depending on the local power markets. Wyoming is a geographically large but very sparsely populated state. It's largest city is in the range of 50,000 people. Maybe a small modular reactor might work for that, but otherwise, large, centralized power production may not be the best choice here.

Popular posts from this blog

Making Clouds for a Living

Donell Banks works at Southern Nuclear’s Plant Vogtle units 3 and 4 as a shift supervisor in Operations, but is in the process of transitioning to his newly appointed role as the daily work controls manager. He has been in the nuclear energy industry for about 11 years.

I love what I do because I have the unique opportunity to help shape the direction and influence the culture for the future of nuclear power in the United States. Every single day presents a new challenge, but I wouldn't have it any other way. As a shift supervisor, I was primarily responsible for managing the development of procedures and programs to support operation of the first new nuclear units in the United States in more than 30 years. As the daily work controls manager, I will be responsible for oversight of the execution and scheduling of daily work to ensure organizational readiness to operate the new units.

I envision a nuclear energy industry that leverages the technology of today to improve efficiency…

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Nuclear: Energy for All Political Seasons

The electoral college will soon confirm a surprise election result, Donald Trump. However, in the electricity world, there are fewer surprises – physics and economics will continue to apply, and Republicans and Democrats are going to find a lot to like about nuclear energy over the next four years.

In a Trump administration, the carbon conversation is going to be less prominent. But the nuclear value proposition is still there. We bring steady jobs to rural areas, including in the Rust Belt, which put Donald Trump in office. Nuclear plants keep the surrounding communities vibrant.

We hold down electricity costs for the whole economy. We provide energy diversity, reducing the risk of disruption. We are a critical part of America’s industrial infrastructure, and the importance of infrastructure is something that President-Elect Trump has stressed.

One of our infrastructure challenges is natural gas pipelines, which have gotten more congested as extremely low gas prices have pulled m…