Skip to main content

Nuclear Cheese from Wisconsin

WISCONSIN_CHEESE BIG Well, cheese, yes, and delicious cheese at that, perhaps created with help from electricity generated by the Dominion-owned Kewaunee nuclear plant, but we mean the  endorsement of nuclear energy coming from Governor Jim Doyle and the cheesiness of the odd hedging Doyle engaged in to get to it.

Doyle said Friday in a conference call organized by the Obama campaign that he agrees with Obama that nuclear power should be considered. Actively endorsing the consideration of nuclear power is a change for Doyle, who previously emphasized his position that the first new plant in the country won't be built in Wisconsin.

Presumably, Doyle is leaving the door open to reverse his position if the political winds shift against it, but it seems a not very coherent stance. The first new plant will be built when a company gets NRC approval and breaks ground. That’s unlikely to be Wisconsin – none of the license applications pending or in progress are for a plant there - so Doyle’s statement makes no particular sense. It doesn’t even seem all that coherent politically.

Doyle spoke out about nuclear power Wednesday, saying he backs his global warming task force's recommendation that utilities be allowed to propose new nuclear power plants under certain conditions. The task force says the plants should be built at a reasonable cost and help meet emission goals.

Ah, there we go. With a task force coming out with the recommendation, Doyle has sufficient cover to make a statement. Even here, there is a fair measure of hedging – of course, such a plant would help meet emission goals if it replaces a emission-producing plant or two and of course, Dominion or another company won’t build  a plant at an unreasonable cost – and with the federal loan guarantee program, a reasonable cost becomes more likely. All this caution piles the cheddar a little thick, but we’ll take it anyway.

Perhaps the Democrats in general and Gov. Doyle in particular are approaching nuclear energy like a squirrel approaches an outstretched hand offering a peanut – ready to bolt at any moment – but it’s a signal change for the party and, we think, a harbinger of  acceptance from the Dems and an Obama administration going forward.

When you’ve got a signature product, flaunt it. After all, we don’t disagree: it is all about the cheese, isn’t it?

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 Nuclear Plant Closures Are a Crisis for Small Town USA

Nuclear plants occupy an unusual spot in the towns where they operate: integral but so much in the background that they may seem almost invisible. But when they close, it can be like the earth shifting underfoot.

Lohud.com, the Gannett newspaper that covers the Lower Hudson Valley in New York, took a look around at the experience of towns where reactors have closed, because the Indian Point reactors in Buchanan are scheduled to be shut down under an agreement with Gov. Mario Cuomo.


From sea to shining sea, it was dismal. It wasn’t just the plant employees who were hurt. The losses of hundreds of jobs, tens of millions of dollars in payrolls and millions in property taxes depressed whole towns and surrounding areas. For example:

Vernon, Vermont, home to Vermont Yankee for more than 40 years, had to cut its municipal budget in half. The town closed its police department and let the county take over; the youth sports teams lost their volunteer coaches, and Vernon Elementary School lost th…