Skip to main content

The 2012 Budget for Nuclear Energy

congressCongress voted on an omnibus appropriations bill that basically funds the entirety of the federal government for the next year. Naturally, our interest lies with the nuclear energy portion of the Department of Energy’s budget.

The executive summary is that the total is more than requested by the Obama administration earlier this year; the accident in Japan has been acknowledged in the budget but how to proceed has been largely left to processes already in place – the NRC’s Near-Term task force, for example; and Yucca Mountain, dead or alive, is not funded.

Here are the details:

The appropriations bill provides $769 million for nuclear science and technology, higher than the president’s $754 million and a sharp increase from the $584 million approved initially by the Senate.

Of particular note is the restoration of $67 million for small reactor development and licensing, which the Senate had earlier zeroed out. Under a cost-shared government-industry program, DOE will select two designs to shepherd through initial NRC technical reviews and licensing.

The legislation provides $187 million for fuel cycle research and development programs, almost $34 million more than originally requested by the president. These programs are likely to become more central to the industry as DOE acts upon the recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future, which will in January finalize its report on managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle.

A last-minute DOE request for funding support for USEC’s American Centrifuge Plant in Ohio failed to be included in the final bill, despite support from the Senate and the president. DOE and both the state’s Senators had sought funding for further development work on the uranium enrichment facility.

Funding for USEC could be revisited when Congress reconvenes in January.

The bill provides $59 million for the Advanced Fuels Program, an increase of $12 million from 2011, to accelerate development of new cladding materials for nuclear fuel.

Many defense-related nuclear energy items received increases over 2011 in a year marked by more stringent budgeting priorities. For example, defense environmental cleanup would receive $5 billion under the bill, $11 million more than in 2011. Nuclear nonproliferation would receive $2.3 billion, $110 million above the 2011 level; and naval reactors would receive $1.08 billion, $141 million higher than in 2011.

The appropriation for DOE is $25.7 billion, $2.1 billion more than what was approved by the House, but $3.9 billion below the Obama administration’s request.

Other funding includes:

  • $40 million for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant. The House committee had budgeted $63.5 million for this program.
  • $5 million for the Integrated University Program for DOE and $15 million for NRC. The House committee had budgeted these amounts for this jointly administered program, but the Senate originally had eliminated the funds.
  • $155 million for Idaho National Laboratory, $5 billion more than the administration’s request.
  • $1.027 billion to the NRC, about $11 million less than requested by the administration. Much of the NRC’s funding is paid by fees collected from licensees. Some $2 million of the appropriation is for a National Academy of Sciences study on lessons learned from the Fukushima Daiichi accident, as recommended by the Blue Ribbon Commission. For the second year running, no funds have been allocated for the Yucca Mountain project.

Comments

seth said…
Peanuts compared to the vast expenditures on worthless not so renewables and fossil fuels.

They should be ashamed of themselves.

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…