NEI Nuclear Notes

Reuters is running an article today, Nuclear energy heats up US presidential campaign , that provides a handy one-pager on the candidates and their support for nuclear energy. John McCain embraces it. Barack Obama wants to address its flaws. Hillary Clinton is cautious but not opposed. Nuclear power—controversial in the United States and throughout much of the world—is on the agenda of all three U.S. presidential candidates as they seek to diversify the country's energy mix and reduce dependence on foreign oil. Interviews with top policy advisers to the three White House hopefuls reveal a varied approach to the technology that some observers see as a necessary answer to fighting climate change and others view as expensive and dangerous. Update : Reuters has published a sidebar, Factbox , presenting each candidate's positions in more detail.

The Wall Street Journal's blog provided some insights on where the three presidential candidates stand on nuclear power. McCain: Douglas Holtz-Eakin, policy director for Sen. McCain, said nukes can’t be left out . ‘The Senate Majority leader is the problem—we have Yucca Mountain [storage facility], we have the technology. I can’t see why we don’t take advantage of that,” he said. Clinton: Gene Sperling, chief economic adviser for Sen. Clinton and a veteran of the other Clinton White House, made it clear that New York’s junior senator “ does not embrace nuclear power ,” for a host of reasons ranging from Yucca Mountain’s uncertain storage to worries over nuclear proliferation. She doesn’t want to take nuclear power—which accounts for 20% of U.S. electricity—“off the table,” she just doesn’t want to see any more of the stuff until it dies of natural causes, he said. Obama: Jason Grumet, Sen. Obama’s energy adviser, appeared to leave the door cracked open—at first . “We have to over...

In a speech yesterday in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Senator Hillary Clinton laid out her energy policy for her presidential campaign. Here's the passage on nuclear energy (PDF): Addressing Nuclear Power : Hillary believes that energy efficiency and renewables are better options for addressing global warming and meeting our future power needs, because of significant unresolved concerns about the cost of producing nuclear power, the safety of operating plants, waste disposal, and nuclear proliferation. Hillary opposes new subsidies for nuclear power, but believes that we need to take additional steps to deal with the problems facing nuclear power. She would strengthen the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and direct it to improve safety and security at nuclear power plants; terminate work at the flawed Yucca Mountain site and convene a panel of scientific experts to explore alternatives for disposing of nuclear waste; and continue research, with a focus on lower costs and improving safety....

The following statement comes from NEI's Media Relations Department: The U.S. Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works held a hearing today on the federal government’s program to dispose of used nuclear fuel from commercial nuclear power plants and high-level radioactive waste from U.S. defense programs at a geologic repository planned for Yucca Mountain, Nev. The Nuclear Energy Institute’s chief nuclear officer, Marvin Fertel, made the following comments about the program. “As the Department of Energy moves steadily closer to the submission of a license application for the planned Yucca Mountain repository to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, today’s hearing was an opportune time to note that there is some 20 years of solid science undergirding this program. Over the past two decades, billions of dollars have been spent on analyses of the repository site by many of our nation’s leading scientific experts. This analysis will continue during construction and operation o...

Grist has put together a page detailing the environmental positions of all the candidates for the Democratic nomination for President , and is also fronting an interview with Senator Hillary Clinton on her environmental positions . Here's her take on nuclear energy: Q. What about nuclear power? A. I am agnostic about nuclear. I am very skeptical that nuclear could become acceptable in most regions of the country, and I am doubtful that we have yet figured out how to deal with the waste. But I keep being given information about research that is being done to resolve the waste problem. I know that will continue because that has a lot of economic power and resources behind it. But until we can figure out what to do with the waste and overcome the political objections, we should not be putting a heavy emphasis on nuclear. For previous posts on Clinton's position, click here and here . Thanks to Ben Smith for the pointer.

In last night's CNN/YouTube Democratic debate , one questioner asked the candidates what they thought about increasing the use of nuclear energy as a way to provide affordable electricity while constraining greenhouse gas emissions and promoting energy independence. Here's how Senators John Edwards, Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton answered the question: This isn't the first time we've seen these candidates address the issue. For our file on Senator Edwards, click here . For Senator Obama, click here . For Senator Clinton, click here . UPDATE : There's some discussion of this particular question over at MyDD . ANOTHER UPDATE : More from The Daily Green . FINAL UPDATE : Some thoughts from NJ Business Matters . EVENING UPDATE : Some interesting thoughts from the Las Vegas Gleaner , while Common Dreams isn't happy with the proceedings at all.

The following comes from a campaign rally held in South Carolina :