Skip to main content

John Kerry on the Boxer-Kerry Bill

clip_image001In a bit of a surprise, Sen. John Kerry (R-Mass.) has taken the lead on the Senate climate change bill – a surprise because it was widely expected Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) would do so – but regardless, this is a topic Kerry has had an interest in for a long time. The Washington Post has a lengthy interview with Kerry, and do go over and read the whole thing, but let’s see what Kerry thinks about nuclear energy:

[The Post’s LOIS] ROMANO: So you have said yourself, this is a work in progress?

SENATOR KERRY: It is. I think we have a terrific starting point, and I'm proud of the progress that we've made. We have a nuclear title in there that actually embraces the notion that nuclear is going to be part of the solution, and we need to simplify and, in fact, accelerate the ability to get decisions and let that market work or not work on its own.

No complaint from us. The bill as presented had seemed to us like a Christmas tree without ornaments – the nuclear title is almost barren, but so are many of the others – and Kerry confirms what we suspected: that the various committees will start hanging those ornaments as they work through the bill.

Kerry gets even more explicit on this point:

MS. ROMANO: You've mentioned nuclear energy a couple of times, but now we also have a leading Republican Senator, John McCain [R-Ariz.], saying he will not support it because there's not enough new funding for nuclear energy. Where's the…

SENATOR KERRY: Well, on the contrary, we've opened up. I mean, the House bill did not, but we have initiated additional funding in order to try to deal with some of the nuclear issues, and we're open to sitting down with John and with others in order to move this process forward.

You know, there will be a committee process. Subsequent to that, we will meld the six different committee interests into one bill, with a leader, with Harry Reid's leadership, and that is the bill that will come to the floor. And then there's plenty of time on the floor for the White House and Senator McCain and all of us to be involved in the negotiation that tries to come up with a bill.

That sounds like the health bill, doesn’t it? So much focus was on the Finance Committee that a lot of commentators forgot that there were other versions of the bill to be merged into a final package. That’s what will happen here, too, so if somewhere along the way, you get disturbed by this provision getting in, that provision pushed out – just wait. Something reasonable might well result from the full process. (We readily admit that the legislative process can break an advocate’s heart, but one might as well wait so as not to keep reassembling the ventricles before the final outcome is known.)

And even better, the architect of this tree recognizes the value of the nuclear ornament.

The Post offers a transcript and the video of the interview. It’d be great if Sen. Boxer had a turn.

We’ll move on to some other subjects next week, but we wanted to stay with this until we fully understood how the bill was going to be assembled and what nuclear energy’s role in it might be. Well, now we know – Kerry goes a long way here explaining the idea behind the legislation. It’s a different approach from the House – where the details were complete in the original bill, then tweaked – but this approach, a kind of tabula rasa, will certainly lead to some interesting hearings. The outcome? We’ll see.

Sen. John Kerry

Comments

Adam said…
Surely you meant (D-Mass.) with respect to John Kerry.

Unless of course he has joined the ranks of Arlen Specter.
Anonymous said…
Ah... I think Kerry is a Democrat. If memory serves, he tried to slay the dragon in 2004.
Climate change, global sea rise, and independence from fossil fuels cannot be seriously dealt with without nuclear power.

So I'm glad to see both Republicans and Democrats strongly supporting more nuclear power.
Anonymous said…
If only he had come around before leading the charge to shut down the Integral Fast Reactor
DocForesight said…
Independence from fossil fuels for electricity generation makes total sense, particularly so when the "right-sized" nukes are readily available. Re-powering coal-fired power plants should be near the top of the list of priorities.

As to the 6 degrees F increase in global temperatures (worst case scenario) and 17 inch sea level rise predicted by some, not so much.

Atomic power stands on its own merits regardless of climatic conditions.
Anonymous said…
John Kerry... hmmm... I heard somewhere he served in Viet Nam...

Popular posts from this blog

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…

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 …

A Billion Miles Under Nuclear Energy (Updated)

And the winner is…Cassini-Huygens, in triple overtime.

The spaceship conceived in 1982 and launched fifteen years later, will crash into Saturn on September 15, after a mission of 19 years and 355 days, powered by the audacity and technical prowess of scientists and engineers from 17 different countries, and 72 pounds of plutonium.

The mission was so successful that it was extended three times; it was intended to last only until 2008.

Since April, the ship has been continuing to orbit Saturn, swinging through the 1,500-mile gap between the planet and its rings, an area not previously explored. This is a good maneuver for a spaceship nearing the end of its mission, since colliding with a rock could end things early.

Cassini will dive a little deeper and plunge toward Saturn’s surface, where it will transmit data until it burns up in the planet’s atmosphere. The radio signal will arrive here early Friday morning, Eastern time. A NASA video explains.

In the years since Cassini has launc…