Skip to main content

Indiana: Introducing Nuclear Energy into the Race

pence-gregg
Mike Pence (l) and John Gregg
Indiana has no nuclear energy facilities. It might never have them – well, never say never – and nothing, such as a ban, actually stops the state from having them. But any large infrastructure project needs a local advocate; one with authority in the state helps, too.

So – meet Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), who is currently running for governor of Indiana.
"When you look at much of the industrialized world today, the technology and the safety record of nuclear energy is one that I think Hoosiers ought to be willing to look at, in addition to developing all of our traditional sources of energy and our renewable sources of energy," Pence said.
The story explains that Indiana has flirted with nuclear facilities a couple of times, but has ended up instead as the rare Midwestern state without one. Illinois has 11, for example.
Pence isn’t hiding his enthusiasm for nuclear energy under a bushel. Many of the stories I looked at about this have it in their headlines and ledes. Pence isn’t the least shy in sharing his views.
“We have next generation nuclear power technology under development right here in Indiana,” Pence said. “Known as small modular reactors, this technology is less expensive and easier to deploy than older generations of nuclear power.”
I couldn’t find Pence explaining this in more detail, but he is likely referring to Babcock & Wilcox, which has a fabrication plant in Mount Vernon and will make its mPower small reactor there.
The Babcock & Wilcox Co. manufactures naval nuclear reactors for submarines and aircraft carriers. For security purposes, U.S. military technology will not be transferred to the mPower reactor project; however, the factories already exist and the additional investments for the initial stages of market adoption are minimal. Another advantage is that the reactor is small enough for the reactor vessel head and bottom to be forged in North America. The B&W Nuclear Operations Group’s Barberton, Ohio, and Mount Vernon, Ind., locations specialize in the design and manufacture of large, heavy components. These two locations are ASME N-Stamp accredited, making them two of only a few North American suppliers of large, heavy-walled nuclear components and vessels.
You can learn a lot more about this at the link.

A little more about B&W’s plan:
When you hear the words "green energy" what typically comes to mind is solar and wind power. However, one of the greenest forms of energy is nuclear. And we have an opportunity in Southwest Indiana to be a major player in the next stage of nuclear energy development.
Babcock & Wilcox recently showcased its newly acquired vertical milling machine that will be used for manufacturing nuclear components. The excitement is due to B&W's future launch of the mPower reactor, a small modular reactor that will be used in conjunction with Generation mPower LLC to design the world's first commercially viable Generation III++ power plant.
Back to Pence:
“In addition to developing all of our traditional sources of energy and our renewable sources of energy, we ought to look at adding nuclear energy to our portfolio if it’s economically feasible and keeps our energy costs low.”
Which it would indeed do.
---
John Gregg is the Democratic candidate for Indiana Governor. He served in the Indiana House for 16 years, as Speaker of the house for four of them. He left politics in 2002, did a stint as radio talk show host and won a battle against prostate cancer before reentering politics via this race.
Daniel Altman, spokesman for the Gregg campaign, pointed to disasters such as Chernobyl, Three Mile Island and Fukushima as reminders that nuclear energy can have serious negative consequences.
“John has been talking with Hoosiers for months about how to keep energy costs down for Indiana, while also creating good-paying energy jobs in the state,” he said. “As someone who has worked for two different coal companies, John knows that we have enormous potential not just for coal, but methane, natural gas, biomass and wind energy, and he will work to further develop these industries.”
Well, he’s an energy veteran, which is always a big plus in our book, but clearly not nuclear-friendly. That’s all right: he and Pence provide a clear cut choice in this regard, and that always makes for a good campaign and election season.

Of course, this is a race for Indianans to decide and I have no brief on the candidates. No one is (or should be) a single issue voter – even nuclear energy advocates -  and Pence and Gregg will happily share their thoughts on any number of topics of interest to Indianans. Some of them may even matter more than nuclear energy to a large group of voters.

Still – about Pence’s full-out support: good for him – and for introducing nuclear energy into the campaign, however it goes. That’s a decided value in itself.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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…

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…