Jim Doyle Rethinking Nuclear Energy

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is reporting that Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle (D) is reconsidering his longtime opposition to the expansion of nuclear energy.

Gov. Jim Doyle on Wednesday agreed with a study panel's call to change Wisconsin's 1983 moratorium on nuclear power plants to prepare for the coming national debate over that type of energy.

At a news conference, Doyle told reporters that his Task Force on Global Warming took a responsible step by recommending changes in the law.

The task force asked that Wisconsin “begin to consider (nuclear power) without the hurdles that the current law puts up — where it can’t even be really thought about,” Doyle said. “I don’t think we should be sitting with our heads in the sand.”

The 1983 law “basically keeps you from even thinking about” the process of approving a new nuclear plant in Wisconsin, he added.

“Let’s at least allow the Public Service Commission to look at” that option, the governor said, referring to the state agency that regulates utilities.

Comments

Joffan said…

Well, it would be a move in the right direction, like it would be if I stopped kicking you, even I didn't actually help you get up from the ground where I knocked you down.

What happens next, I wonder... two years of wrangling in legislative committees?

August 7, 2008 at 1:56 PM

Brian Mays said…

Well, I don't know about you, but I prefer it when people stop kicking me.

August 7, 2008 at 2:41 PM

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...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog