Skip to main content

Chu: Nuclear Must Be Part of Energy Mix

Not our headline – that of the AP story that covers Energy Secretary Steven Chu’s testimony before the Senate Budget Committee. A lot of the Senators there had no intention of letting nuclear energy slip away as a priority and Chu reassured them that it won’t.

Some money quotes:

"I believe in nuclear power as a central part of our energy mix. It provides clean, busload [sic: baseload] electricity"

“Closing the fuel cycle is something we want to do.”

Chu said he is ready to act on loan guarantees for the first group of new reactors and plans on "moving very aggressively to getting the money out the door."

"Nuclear is going to be part of our energy future. It has to be."

Read the whole story for the senatorial jitters – all good, in our view – and Chu’s remarkably reassuring performance. We’ve noticed that the Obama administration has displayed a tendency to roll back over an issue it’s passed by once – see the squabble over earmarks in the omnibus spending bill, for one – so, although Chu has never been particularly harsh in his rhetoric about nuclear energy, we now have to see if these soothing words are followed by effective actions.

Consider these tangles between Congress and the administration preludes to an energy policy. That’s where the tale will really be told.

Comments

Anonymous said…
I'm glad that Chu actually said that nuclear must be part of the mix.

One observation I need make is that recently T. Boone Pickens has been making his rounds on various talk and news programs pushing his wind program.

Is there someone that the NEI can put in front of the cameras to address the public via popular news and talk shows? This person would need to speak to the public in very simple and positive terms and I believe that would produce more public awareness and desire for what nuclear power means to the average consumer.

I am a homemaker who is married to a nuclear engineer, so I am biased on this subject. However, I believe that if you put the right person in front of the cameras, you will get the right results.
Anonymous said…
Words are good, but actions are more important. There were $50 billion in loan guarantees in the stimulus bill, but that $50 billion disappeared in the final version. Loan guarantees don't cost the government anything so long as the construction projects get completed.

With the new licensing process, where the Design Certification and Construction and Operating license are approved before any concrete is poured, the likelihood of the projects being completed is much better than in the bad old days.
It looks like the Senate Republicans have finally gotten serious about vocalizing their support for nuclear energy in order to help this country.

McCain did it last week and now other Republicans are joining in. This is the kind of bipartisanship that the Obama administration needs and probably wanted to hear, and the kind of support Dr. Chu needs from the Republicans in order for him to advise Obama on advancing nuclear energy and mitigating global sea rise.
Anonymous said…
I think that the main problem for the nuclear loan guarantees in the stimulus package was in the House of Representatives. Let's hope for a course correction there in 2 years.

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...

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...

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...