[Approx. Read Time: 4 minutes]
NEI Nuclear Notes covered President Obama’s comments on nuclear power late last week during his trip to New Orleans. Here they are:
“There’s no reason why technologically we can’t employ nuclear energy in a safe and effective way. Japan does it and France does it and it doesn’t have greenhouse gas emissions, so it would be stupid for us not to do that in a much more effective way.”
Sounds good.
As you are probably already aware, Senators Kerry and Boxer are currently working with their colleagues on the Senate version of the climate bill. With important promises to make nuclear power a player in the bill, the progress has been refreshing.
Yesterday, the National Journal Online has started a debate between key players from both sides of the nuclear power aisle. The question is whether or not nuclear should have a place in the Boxer-Kerry Bill. There are currently eight responses from the following people:
- Carl Pope, President - Sierra Club
- Rep. Joe Pitts, R-PA - Member, House Energy and Commerce Committee, U.S. House Of Representatives
- Marvin Fertel, President and CEO - Nuclear Energy Institute
- Frank O’Brien-Bernini, Chief Sustainability Officer - Owens Corning
- Arjun Makhijani, President - Institute for Energy and Environmental Research
- Rep. Joe Barton, R-TX - Ranking Member, Energy and Commerce Committee, U.S. House Of Representatives
- Bill Snape, Senior Counsel - Center For Biological Diversity
- Sen. James Inhofe, R-OK - Ranking Republican, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
Why don’t you head over to the National Journal, check out the responses and submit your vote on who you agree with the most. Link here.
Monday, October 19, 2009
Does Nuclear Fit The Bill?
Recent endorsements by key senators, such as John Kerry, D-Mass., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., (in their joint op-ed) and Tom Carper, D-Del., could be early signs nuclear energy is gaining traction as an indispensable part of the recently introduced Senate climate change legislation. Still, lawmakers and experts alike cite obstacles, including high construction costs and lengthy license processes, that the industry will need to overcome.
What obstacles do you think are holding up nuclear development? Should the climate bill include provisions to help revitalize the industry, such as streamlining the process of getting new plants built? And if so, how? Would nuclear provisions help Senate leaders win 60 votes? Alternatively, why do you think nuclear energy should not be an integral part of Kerry-Boxer?
– Amy Harder, NationalJournal.com
I hew more to Sen. Inhof’s approach than the others - even those who favor nuclear language in the K-B bill. Separate the issues of climate and energy. If the climate concerns have merit, they can stand on their own.
Members of Congress need to take a stand on whether America is going to continue the slow suicide march of denying access to our own resources while paying lip service to “addiction to imported oil” or actually opening up those leases and areas heretofore off-limits.
On nuclear power, either we are serious about regaining the lead on design, manufacturing and maintenance of NPPs or we will be remembered as what used to be our leading role.