Skip to main content

NARUC's View on Suspension of the Nuclear Waste Fee

Over at our main website, we've just published a Q&A with the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners on what might happen next with the Nuclear Waste Fee. Among the takeaways:
  • As of Dec. 31, 2013, consumers have paid more than $20 billion into fund
  • While fee is no longer being collected, interest accrues on the balance
  • NARUC believes once program "gets back on its feet," collection of the fee would resume
The fee totaled about $750 million a year industrywide and, since its inception, more than $20 billion has been paid into the fund by nuclear energy consumers. See map for totals by state:


Our readers will recall that the fee was suspended last month after an appellate court ruled last November that in light of the department’s termination of the Yucca Mountain repository program, DOE could not continue to collect the surcharge of one-tenth of a cent per kilowatt-hour on consumers of nuclear-generated electricity. Here's what NEI's Marv Fertel had to say last month when the fee was finally suspended.



For more details on nuclear waste management, see our website.

Comments

The nuclear waste fund should be used to finance:

1. The building of temporary Federal spent fuel repositories located in every State that produces spent fuel.

2. The building of spent fuel reprocessing plants to gradually introduce reprocessed fuel into current reactors and eventually into next generation thorium reactors.

Treating spent fuel like hazardous waste instead of as a reusable source of clean energy only helps to demonize the commercial nuclear industry, IMO.

Marcel
Joffan said…
A $20 billion fund has power to change things without even spending it. This could be used as assurance to justify widespread low-interest loans for nuclear construction without any fees or claims of subsidy - it's the nuclear industry that is subsidizing the government right now, after all.
Anonymous said…
The waste fee is/was paid by electricity consumers, not "the nuclear industry." That fee is for management and disposal of spent nuclear fuel from commercial power reactors, not development of the nuclear power industry.
Mitch said…
Marcel F. Williams said...>Treating spent fuel like hazardous waste instead of as a reusable source of clean energy only helps to demonize the commercial nuclear industry, IMO.<

Can't be shouted hard enough!
Anonymous said…
NEI is thumping its chest over Harry Reid smirking while you filed suit to stop the collection of financial resources needed to review an active license application, close the fuel cycle and regain waste confidence? Guys, your lawyers are myopic, you've won a lawsuit this is going to lose you the war. It isn't just about resuming NWF contributions (BTW, that is such a shallow analysis that it hurts my head just reading it) because the momentum and critical mass for the entire program has been obliterated. Stopping the contributions was a totally wasted effort. You guys were duped and diverted. The focus should have been on the Mandamus, contempt of the court with some jail time to think about it, no confidence votes in Congress, and investigations of malfeasance in the Senate ML office and White House, and misfeasance in the Jaczko, MacFarlane, Chu and Moniz regiemes.

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…