Skip to main content

The Ex-Im Bank and Nuclear Energy

exim-logoThe Senate approved reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank this week. This made the first page of the Washington Post, but largely because it showed a level of comity not always seen in the Senate. As a subject, the Ex-Im bank is a little dry for many.

So what does the bank do?

The bank, which takes no money from taxpayers, last year provided export-financing support for about 2 percent of U.S. exports, about $32 billion in loans, loan guarantees and credit financing. Some $11 billion of that supported Boeing sales of large commercial aircrafts.

Countering critics who say it is “Boeing’s bank,” the bank says that 87 percent of its transactions last year directly benefited small businesses and that its financing supported 290,000 jobs, including 85,000 in the aerospace industry.

I’ll let you read about the Boeing-Delta dustup at the link – not really our brief – but the bottom line is that bank can enhance, well, the bottom line by easing the financial aspects of exporting goods and services. One can argue about the bank’s efficacy, but consider: all countries that maintain a global presence have the equivalent of an export-import bank.

So the news that it won reauthorization – and by a lot, 78-20 – in the face of some opposition, won exceptionally broad praise and some sighs of relief.

National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) President and CEO Jay Timmons said that “the Senate stood up for jobs” by passing the legislation:

“Manufacturers  have been at the forefront of this debate, meeting with lawmakers and sharing how important the Bank is to growing exports, especially for small and medium-sized manufacturers.”

U.S. Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Thomas J. Donohue on the importance of the bank:

“When other countries are providing their own exporters with an estimated $1 trillion in export finance—often on terms more generous than Ex-Im can provide—failure to reauthorize Ex-Im would amount to unilateral disarmament and cost tens of thousands of American jobs.”

More locally, NEI added its support. “The Senate’s reauthorization of the Ex-Im Bank will yield positive policy and economic impacts for many years to come,” said Richard Myers, NEI’s vice president for policy development, planning and supplier programs.

Myers explained the importance of the bank to the industry.

“Absolutely critical for U.S.-based suppliers of commercial reactors and components,” Myers said, “the Ex-Im Bank enhances the position of U.S. suppliers competing for international business by offsetting the advantage provided by other countries’ export credit agencies.”

The global nuclear energy business could provide as much as $740 billion in potential business over the next ten years, Myers said, and that by capturing a share of this growing market, the United States can extend its influence over nonproliferation policy and nuclear plant safety.”

I suspect many ignored this particular story, but it got outsized attention – as it should have – from industry and its representatives – and from many individual industries – such as nuclear – and its representatives.

And all for a good outcome.

Comments

Anonymous said…
"“Absolutely critical for U.S.-based suppliers of commercial reactors and components,”"

Are there any U.S.-based suppliers of commercial reactors? Both Westinghouse and GE are owned by Japanese companies.

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

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...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

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...

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...